Wednesday, 

May 19, 2010 

Part III 

Environmental 

Protection Agency 

40 CFR Part 180 

Acephate, Cacodylic acid, Dicamba, 

Dicloran et al.; Proposed Tolerance 

Actions; Proposed Rule 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2
28156 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 19, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 180 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2010–0262; FRL–8821–3] 

Acephate, Cacodylic acid, Dicamba, 

Dicloran et al.; Proposed Tolerance 

Actions 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to revoke 

certain tolerances for the fungicides 

dicloran and thiophanate-methyl; the 

herbicides EPTC, hexazinone, picloram, 

and propazine; the defoliant and 

herbicide cacodylic acid; the plant 

growth regulator and herbicide diquat, 

the insecticides disulfoton, malathion, 

methamidophos, methomyl, phosmet, 

piperonyl butoxide, pyrethrins, and 

thiodicarb; the fumigant antimicrobial 

and insecticide methyl bromide, the 

nematicides/insecticides ethoprop and 

fenamiphos, the insecticide synergist Noctyl bicycloheptene dicarboximide, 

and the tolerance exemptions for the 

insecticide/miticide pyrethrum and 

insecticide synergist N-octyl 

bicycloheptene dicarboximide. In 

addition, EPA is proposing to remove 

certain expired tolerances for 

disulfoton, fenamiphos, and 

thiophanate-methyl. Also, EPA is 

proposing to modify certain tolerances 

for the fungicide thiophanate-methyl, 

herbicides dicamba, EPTC, hexazinone 

and picloram, and insecticide synergist 

N-octyl bicycloheptene dicarboximide. 

In addition, EPA is proposing to 

establish new tolerances for the 

fungicide thiophanate-methyl and the 

herbicides EPTC, hexazinone, and 

picloram. Also, EPA is proposing to 

reinstate specific tolerances for 

methamidophos residues as a result of 

the application of the insecticide 

acephate. The regulatory actions 

proposed in this document are in 

follow-up to the Agency’s reregistration 

program under the Federal Insecticide, 

Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act 

(FIFRA), and tolerance reassessment 

program under the Federal Food, Drug, 

and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), section 

408(q). 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before July 19, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by docket identification (ID) 

number EPA–HQ–OPP–2010–0262, by 

one of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs 

(OPP) Regulatory Public Docket (7502P), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, 

DC 20460–0001. 

• Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public 

Docket (7502P), Environmental 

Protection Agency, Rm. S–4400, One 

Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. 

Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries 

are only accepted during the Docket 

Facility’s normal hours of operation 

(8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, excluding legal holidays). 

Special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. The 

Docket Facility telephone number is 

(703) 305–5805. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–2010– 

0262. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the docket 

without change and may be made 

available on-line at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through regulations.gov or email. The regulations.gov website is an 

‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an e-mail comment directly 

to EPA without going through 

regulations.gov, your e-mail address 

will be automatically captured and 

included as part of the comment that is 

placed in the docket and made available 

on the Internet. If you submit an 

electronic comment, EPA recommends 

that you include your name and other 

contact information in the body of your 

comment and with any disk or CD-ROM 

you submit. If EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

EPA may not be able to consider your 

comment. Electronic files should avoid 

the use of special characters, any form 

of encryption, and be free of any defects 

or viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the docket index available 

at http://www.regulations.gov. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

is not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy 

form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either in the 

electronic docket at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, or, if only 

available in hard copy, at the OPP 

Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S– 

4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 

2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The 

hours of operation of this Docket 

Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, excluding legal 

holidays. The Docket Facility telephone 

number is (703) 305–5805. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Joseph Nevola, Pesticide Re-evaluation 

Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide 

Programs, Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave, NW., 

Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone 

number: (703) 308-8037; e-mail address: 

nevola.joseph@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information 

A. Does this Action Apply to Me? 

You may be potentially affected by 

this action if you are an agricultural 

producer, food manufacturer, or 

pesticide manufacturer. Potentially 

affected entities may include, but are 

not limited to: 

• Crop production (NAICS code 111). 

• Animal production (NAICS code 

112). 

• Food manufacturing (NAICS code 

311). 

• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS 

code 32532). 

This listing is not intended to be 

exhaustive, but rather provides a guide 

for readers regarding entities likely to be 

affected by this action. Other types of 

entities not listed in this unit could also 

be affected. The North American 

Industrial Classification System 

(NAICS) codes have been provided to 

assist you and others in determining 

whether this action might apply to 

certain entities. To determine whether 

you or your business may be affected by 

this action, you should carefully 

examine the applicability provisions in 

Unit II.A. If you have any questions 

regarding the applicability of this action 

to a particular entity, consult the person 

listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT. 

B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare 

My Comments for EPA? 

1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this 

information to EPA through 

regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark 

the part or all of the information that 

you claim to be CBI. For CBI 

information in a disk or CD-ROM that 

you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the 

disk or CD-ROM as CBI and then 

identify electronically within the disk or 

CD-ROM the specific information that is 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 19, 2010 / Proposed Rules 28157 

claimed as CBI. In addition to one 

complete version of the comment that 

includes information claimed as CBI, a 

copy of the comment that does not 

contain the information claimed as CBI 

must be submitted for inclusion in the 

public docket. Information so marked 

will not be disclosed except in 

accordance with procedures set forth in 

40 CFR part 2. 

2. Tips for preparing your comments. 

When submitting comments, remember 

to: 

i. Identify the document by docket ID 

number and other identifying 

information (subject heading, Federal 

Register date and page number). 

ii. Follow directions. The Agency may 

ask you to respond to specific questions 

or organize comments by referencing a 

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 

or section number. 

iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; 

suggest alternatives and substitute 

language for your requested changes. 

iv. Describe any assumptions and 

provide any technical information and/ 

or data that you used. 

v. If you estimate potential costs or 

burdens, explain how you arrived at 

your estimate in sufficient detail to 

allow for it to be reproduced. 

vi. Provide specific examples to 

illustrate your concerns and suggest 

alternatives. 

vii. Explain your views as clearly as 

possible, avoiding the use of profanity 

or personal threats. 

viii. Make sure to submit your 

comments by the comment period 

deadline identified. 

C. What Can I do if I Wish the Agency 

to Maintain a Tolerance that the Agency 

Proposes to Revoke? 

This proposed rule provides a 

comment period of 60 days for any 

person to state an interest in retaining 

a tolerance proposed for revocation. If 

EPA receives a comment within the 60– 

day period to that effect, EPA will not 

proceed to revoke the tolerance 

immediately. However, EPA will take 

steps to ensure the submission of any 

needed supporting data and will issue 

an order in the Federal Register under 

FFDCA section 408(f), if needed. The 

order would specify data needed and 

the timeframes for its submission, and 

would require that within 90 days some 

person or persons notify EPA that they 

will submit the data. If the data are not 

submitted as required in the order, EPA 

will take appropriate action under 

FFDCA. 

EPA issues a final rule after 

considering comments that are 

submitted in response to this proposed 

rule. In addition to submitting 

comments in response to this proposal, 

you may also submit an objection at the 

time of the final rule. If you fail to file 

an objection to the final rule within the 

time period specified, you will have 

waived the right to raise any issues 

resolved in the final rule. After the 

specified time, issues resolved in the 

final rule cannot be raised again in any 

subsequent proceedings. 

II. Background 

A. What Action is the Agency Taking? 

EPA is proposing to revoke, modify, 

and establish specific tolerances for 

residues of the fungicides dicloran and 

thiophanate-methyl; the herbicides 

dicamba, EPTC, hexazinone, picloram, 

and propazine; the defoliant and 

herbicide cacodylic acid; the plant 

growth regulator and herbicide diquat, 

the insecticides disulfoton, malathion, 

methamidophos, methomyl, phosmet, 

piperonyl butoxide, pyrethrins, and 

thiodicarb; the fumigant antimicrobial 

and insecticide methyl bromide, the 

nematicides/insecticides ethoprop and 

fenamiphos; and the insecticide 

synergist N-octyl bicycloheptene 

dicarboximide; revoke the tolerance 

exemptions for the insecticide/miticide 

pyrethrum and insecticide synergist Noctyl bicycloheptene dicarboximide; 

remove certain expired tolerances for 

disulfoton, fenamiphos, and 

thiophanate-methyl; and reinstate 

specific tolerances for methamidophos 

residues as a result of the application of 

the insecticide acephate in or on 

commodities listed in the regulatory 

text. 

EPA is proposing these tolerance/ 

tolerance exemption actions to 

implement the tolerance 

recommendations made during the 

reregistration and tolerance 

reassessment processes (including 

follow-up on canceled or additional 

uses of pesticides). As part of these 

processes, EPA is required to determine 

whether each of the amended tolerances 

meets the safety standard of FFDCA. 

The safety finding determination of 

‘‘reasonable certainty of no harm’’ is 

discussed in detail in each 

Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED) 

and Report of the Food Quality 

Protection Act (FQPA) Tolerance 

Reassessment Progress and Risk 

Management Decision (TRED) for the 

active ingredient. REDs and TREDs 

recommend the implementation of 

certain tolerance actions, including 

modifications to reflect current use 

patterns, meet safety findings, and 

change commodity names and 

groupings in accordance with new EPA 

policy. Printed copies of many REDs 

and TREDs may be obtained from EPA’s 

National Service Center for 

Environmental Publications (EPA/ 

NSCEP), P.O. Box 42419, Cincinnati, 

OH 45242–2419; telephone number: 1– 

800–490–9198; fax number: 1–513–489– 

8695; Internet at http://www.epa.gov/

ncepihom and from the National 

Technical Information Service (NTIS), 

5285 Port Royal Rd., Springfield, VA 

22161; telephone number: 1–800–553– 

6847 or (703) 605–6000; Internet at 

http://www.ntis.gov. Electronic copies of 

REDs and TREDs are available on the 

Internet in public dockets; REDs for 

cacodylic acid (EPA–HQ–OPP–2006– 

0201), dicamba (EPA–HQ–OPP–2005– 

0479), ethoprop (EPA–HQ–OPP–2002– 

0269), malathion (EPA–HQ–OPP–2004– 

0348), N-octyl bicycloheptene 

dicarboximide (EPA–HQ–OPP–2005– 

0040), pyrethrum (see pyrethrins RED in 

EPA–HQ–OPP–2005–0043), and 

thiophanate-methyl (EPA–HQ–OPP– 

2004–0265), and TREDs for hexazinone 

(EPA–HQ–OPP–2002–0188) and 

propazine (EPA–HQ–OPP–2005-0496) at 

http://www.regulations.gov and REDs 

for acephate, EPTC, methamidophos, 

phosmet, and picloram at http:// 

www.epa.gov/pesticides/reregistration/

status.htm. 

The selection of an individual 

tolerance level is based on crop field 

residue studies designed to produce the 

maximum residues under the existing or 

proposed product label. Generally, the 

level selected for a tolerance is a value 

slightly above the maximum residue 

found in such studies, provided that the 

tolerance is safe. The evaluation of 

whether a tolerance is safe is a separate 

inquiry. EPA recommends the raising of 

a tolerance when data show that: 

• Lawful use (sometimes through a 

label change) may result in a higher 

residue level on the commodity. 

• The tolerance remains safe, 

notwithstanding increased residue level 

allowed under the tolerance. 

In REDs, Chapter IV on ‘‘Risk 

management, Reregistration, and 

Tolerance reassessment’’ typically 

describes the regulatory position, FQPA 

assessment, cumulative safety 

determination, determination of safety 

for U.S. general population, and safety 

for infants and children. In particular, 

the human health risk assessment 

document which supports the RED 

describes risk exposure estimates and 

whether the Agency has concerns. In 

TREDs, the Agency discusses its 

evaluation of the dietary risk associated 

with the active ingredient and whether 

it can determine that there is a 

reasonable certainty (with appropriate 

mitigation) that no harm to any 

population subgroup will result from 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2
28158 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 19, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

aggregate exposure. EPA also seeks to 

harmonize tolerances with international 

standards set by the Codex Alimentarius 

Commission, as described in Unit III. 

Explanations for proposed 

modifications in tolerances can be 

found in the RED and TRED document 

and in more detail in the Residue 

Chemistry Chapter document which 

supports the RED and TRED. Copies of 

the Residue Chemistry Chapter 

documents are found in the 

Administrative Record and electronic 

copies for dicamba, ethoprop (Data 

Requirements and Tolerance 

Reassessment), hexazinone, malathion, 

N-octyl bicycloheptene dicarboximide, 

propazine, pyrethrum (see pyrethrins), 

and thiophanate-methyl can be found 

under their respective public docket ID 

numbers, identified in Unit II.A. 

Electronic copies are also available in 

public dockets for acephate (EPA–HQ– 

OPP–2007–0445), cacodylic acid (EPA– 

HQ–OPP–2006–0201), methamidophos 

(EPA–HQ–OPP–2007–0261), and 

phosmet (EPA–HQ–OPP–2008–0834), 

and for EPTC in the public docket for 

this proposed rule. Electronic copies are 

available through EPA’s electronic 

public docket and comment system, 

regulations.gov at http:// 

www.regulations.gov. You may search 

for this proposed rule under docket ID 

number EPA–HQ–OPP–2010-0262, then 

click on that docket ID number to view 

its contents. 

EPA has determined that the aggregate 

exposures and risks are not of concern 

for the above mentioned pesticide active 

ingredients based upon the data 

identified in the RED or TRED which 

lists the submitted studies that the 

Agency found acceptable. 

EPA has found that the tolerances/ 

tolerance exemptions that are proposed 

in this document to be modified, are 

safe; i.e., that there is a reasonable 

certainty that no harm will result to 

infants and children from aggregate 

exposure to the pesticide chemical 

residues, in accordance with FFDCA 

section 408(b)(2)(C). (Note that changes 

to tolerance nomenclature do not 

constitute modifications of tolerances). 

These findings are discussed in detail in 

each RED or TRED. The references are 

available for inspection as described in 

this document under SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION. 

In addition, EPA is proposing to 

revoke certain specific tolerances/ 

tolerance exemptions because either 

they are no longer needed or are 

associated with food uses that are no 

longer registered under FIFRA. Those 

instances where registrations were 

canceled were because the registrant 

failed to pay the required maintenance 

fee and/or the registrant voluntarily 

requested cancellation of one or more 

registered uses of the pesticide. It is 

EPA’s general practice to propose 

revocation of those tolerances/tolerance 

exemptions for residues of pesticide 

active ingredients on crop uses for 

which there are no active registrations 

under FIFRA, unless any person in 

comments on the proposal indicates a 

need for the tolerance to cover residues 

in or on imported commodities or 

legally treated domestic commodities. 

1. Acephate. In order to describe more 

clearly the measurement and scope or 

coverage of the tolerances, EPA is 

proposing to revise the introductory text 

containing the tolerance expression in 

40 CFR 180.108(a)(1) to read as follows: 

Tolerances are established for residues of 

acephate, O,S-dimethyl acetyl 

phosphoramidothioate, including its 

metabolites and degradates other than 

methamidophos, in or on the commodities in 

the table in this paragraph. Compliance with 

the tolerance levels specified in this 

paragraph is to be determined by measuring 

only acephate, O,S-dimethyl acetyl 

phosphoramidothioate, in or on the 

commodity. 

In the Federal Register of January 29, 

2008 (73 FR 5104) (FRL–8348–8), EPA 

revised the tolerance expression for 

acephate in 40 CFR 180.108 from the 

combined residues of acephate, O,Sdimethyl acetyl phosphoramidothioate, 

and methamidophos, O,S-dimethyl 

phosphoramidothioate, to residues of 

acephate per se, removed the 

terminology ‘‘of which no more than 1 

ppm, 0.5 ppm, or 0.1 ppm is O,Sdimethyl phosphoramidothioate’’ from 

tolerances on bean (succulent and dry); 

Brussels sprouts; cauliflower; celery; 

cranberry; lettuce, head; mint hay, and 

pepper; and footnoted that residues of 

the acephate metabolite, 

methamidophos, are regulated under 40 

CFR 180.315. However, the basis for this 

action was in error, as methamidophos 

tolerances for bean, dry, seed; bean, 

succulent; cranberry; peppermint, tops; 

and spearmint, tops had not in fact been 

established in 40 CFR 180.315. To 

remedy this inadvertent error, the 

Agency proposes to reinstate the 40 CFR 

180.108 tolerances. Consequently, EPA 

is proposing to separate tolerances for 

residues of methamidophos from the 

application of acephate in newly 

designated 40 CFR 180.108(a)(3), with 

the introductory text to read as follows: 

Tolerances are established for residues of 

methamidophos, O,S-dimethyl 

phosphoramidothioate, including its 

metabolites and degradates, in or on the 

commodities in the table in this paragraph as 

a result of the application of acephate. 

Compliance with the tolerance levels 

specified in this paragraph is to be 

determined by measuring only 

methamidophos, O,S-dimethyl 

phosphoramidothioate, in or on the 

commodity. 

In addition, EPA is proposing to 

reinstate the tolerances in 40 CFR 

180.108(a)(3) on bean, dry, seed at 1 

ppm; bean, succulent at 1 ppm; Brussels 

sprouts at 0.5 ppm; cauliflower at 0.5 

ppm (which is in harmony with the 

Codex maximumn residue limits (MRL) 

of 0.5 milligrams/kilogram (mg/kg) on 

cauliflower); celery 1 ppm; cranberry at 

0.1 ppm; lettuce, head at 1 ppm; pepper 

at 1 ppm; and reinstate mint hay, 

revising the tolerance terminology to 

peppermint, tops at 1 ppm and 

spearmint, tops at 1 ppm. On January 

29, 2008, EPA published a final rule in 

the Federal Register (73 FR 5104) (FRL– 

8348–8), which finalized tolerance 

actions for several active ingredients, 

including acephate, and which 

increased the tolerances in 40 CFR 

180.108(a)(1) for acephate residues in or 

on mint hay (peppermint, tops and 

spearmint, tops) from 15.0 to 27.0 ppm. 

Consequently, methamidophos residues 

resulting from acephate application are 

expected by the Agency to be increased 

from 1.0 to 2.0 ppm in or on 

peppermint, tops and spearmint, tops. 

However, the Agency is not proposing 

an increase on the peppermint, tops and 

spearmint, tops tolerances for 

methamidophos residues at this time. 

Based on available data that showed 

residues of acephate were as high as 

0.02 ppm for only one of seven exposed 

food items following both a spot 

treatment and crack/crevice treatment 

for rooms treated with acephate at the 

1x rate and residues of methamidophos 

were undetectable from these acephate 

treatments, the Agency determined that 

a tolerance level of 0.02 ppm for 

acephate residues was appropriate and 

that there was no expectation of 

methamidophos residues and therefore 

no methamidophos tolerance was 

needed concerning food handling 

establishments. Consequently, 

compliance with the tolerance at 0.02 

ppm in 40 CFR 180.108(a)(2) should 

continue to be determined by measuring 

only acephate residues. However, in 

order to describe more clearly the 

measurement and scope or coverage of 

the tolerances, EPA is proposing to 

revise the introductory text containing 

the tolerance expression in 40 CFR 

180.108(a)(2), to read as follows: 

A tolerance of 0.02 ppm is established for 

residues of acephate, O,S-dimethyl acetyl 

phosphoramidothioate, including its 

metabolites and degradates other than 

methamidophos, in or on all food items 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 19, 2010 / Proposed Rules 28159 

(other than those already covered by a higher 

tolerance as a result of use on growing crops) 

in food handling establishments where food 

and food products are held, processed, 

prepared and served, including food service, 

manufacturing and processing 

establishments, such as restaurants, 

cafeterias, supermarkets, bakeries, breweries, 

dairies, meat slaughtering and packing 

plants, and canneries, where application of 

acephate shall be limited solely to spot and/ 

or crack and crevice treatment (a coarse, lowpressure spray shall be used to avoid 

atomization or splashing of the spray for spot 

treatments; equipment capable of delivering 

a pin-stream of insecticide shall be used for 

crack and crevice treatments). Spray 

concentration shall be limited to a maximum 

of 1.0 percent active ingredient. 

Contamination of food or food-contact 

surfaces shall be avoided. Compliance with 

the tolerance levels specified in this 

paragraph is to be determined by measuring 

only acephate, O,S-dimethyl acetyl 

phosphoramidothioate, in or on the 

commodity. 

Because EPA is proposing to revise 40 

CFR 180.108(a)(2) and include text from 

40 CFR 180.108(a)(2)(i) and (a)(2)(ii), 

existing paragraphs (a)(2)(i) and (a)(2)(ii) 

are no longer needed. Therefore, EPA is 

proposing to remove 40 CFR 

180.108(a)(2)(i) and (a)(2)(ii). 

In order to describe more clearly the 

measurement and scope or coverage of 

the tolerances, EPA is proposing to 

revise the introductory text containing 

the regional tolerance expression in 40 

CFR 180.108(c) to read as follows: 

A tolerance with a regional registration is 

established for residues of acephate, O,Sdimethyl acetyl phosphoramidothioate, 

including its metabolites and degradates 

other than methamidophos, in or on the 

commodity in the table in this paragraph. 

Compliance with the tolerance level 

specified in this paragraph is to be 

determined by measuring only acephate, O,Sdimethyl acetyl phosphoramidothioate, in or 

on the commodity. 

Also, EPA is proposing to revise the 

table footnote in 40 CFR 180.108(a)(1) 

and add a table footnote in 40 CFR 

180.108(c) to read as follows: 

Where there is a direct use of 

methamidophos on the commodity, residues 

of methamidophos resulting from 

methamidophos application are regulated 

under 40 CFR 180.315. 

There are Codex MRLs for acephate, 

including those on beans, except broad 

bean and soya bean at 5 mg/kg, 

cauliflower at 2 mg/kg, cranberry at 0.5 

mg/kg, peppers, chili (dry) at 50 mg/kg, 

and other commodities. 

2. Cacodylic acid. In the Federal 

Register notice of July 8, 2009 (74 FR 

32596) (FRL–8422–6), EPA issued a 

notice regarding EPA’s announcement 

of the receipt of requests from 

registrants to voluntarily cancel certain 

registrations, including ones for 

cacodylic acid (and sodium salt) and 

therefore terminate the last cacodylic 

acid (and sodium salt) uses in or on 

cotton. After the close of the 30–day 

comment period, EPA approved 

cancellation of certain registrations, 

including the cacodylic acid (and 

sodium salt) registrations for uses in or 

on cotton and issued a cancellation 

order in the Federal Register notice of 

September 30, 2009 (74 FR 50187)(FRL– 

8437–7), made them effective on 

September 30, 2009, and prohibited the 

registrants for the canceled cacodylic 

acid (and sodium salt) registrations to 

sell and distribute existing stocks after 

December 31, 2009. Also, EPA 

prohibited persons other than the 

registrant to sell and distribute the 

canceled cacodylic acid (and sodium 

salt) existing stocks after December 31, 

2010. The Agency believes that end 

users will have had sufficient time to 

exhaust those existing stocks and for 

treated cotton commodities to have 

cleared the channels of trade by January 

1, 2012. The termination of the last 

cacodylic acid (and sodium salt) uses in 

or on cotton means that the tolerance 

will no longer be needed and should be 

revoked with an expiration/revocation 

date. Therefore, EPA is proposing to 

revoke the tolerance in 40 CFR 

180.311(a) on cotton, undelinted seed 

with an expiration/revocation date of 

January 1, 2012. 

Currently, tolerances are expressed for 

the defoliant cacodylic acid in 40 CFR 

180.311(a) for residues of cacodylic acid 

(dimethylarsinic acid), expressed as 

As2O3. In order to describe more clearly 

the measurement and scope or coverage 

of the tolerances, EPA is proposing to 

revise the introductory text containing 

the tolerance expression in 40 CFR 

180.311(a) to read as follows: 

A tolerance is established for residues of 

the defoliant cacodylic acid, dimethylarsinic 

acid, including its metabolites and 

degradates, in or on the commodity in the 

table in this paragraph. Compliance with the 

tolerance level specified in this paragraph is 

to be determined by measuring only those 

cacodylic acid residues convertible to As2O3, 

expressed as the stoichiometric equivalent of 

cacodylic acid, in or on the commodity. 

There are no Codex MRLs for 

cacodylic acid. 

3. Dicamba. Based on available 

processing data that showed an average 

concentration factor of 24.4X for 

molasses and the Highest Average Field 

Trial (HAFT) residue of 0.183 ppm for 

sugarcane, EPA determined that the 

expected combined dicamba residues of 

concern in sugarcane molasses are 4.465 

ppm, and that the currently established 

tolerance of 2.0 ppm for sugarcane 

molasses should be increased from 2.0 

to 5.0 ppm. Therefore, the Agency is 

proposing to increase the tolerance in 40 

CFR 180.227(a)(1) on sugarcane, 

molasses to 5.0 ppm. The Agency 

determined that the increased tolerance 

is safe; i.e., there is a reasonable 

certainty that no harm will result from 

aggregate exposure to the pesticide 

chemical residue. 

Based on available sugarcane field 

trial data that showed combined 

dicamba residues of concern as high as 

0.2 ppm in or on sugarcane harvested 

87-173 days following a single layby 

application at 2.0 lb dicamba acid 

equivalents per acre (ae/A), EPA 

determined that the tolerance should be 

increased from 0.1 to 0.3 ppm. While 

the available data, conducted at an 

application rate of 2.0 lb dicamba ae/A, 

do not support the maximum seasonal 

single/yearly rate of 2.8 lb dicamba ae/ 

A that was listed in the Dicamba Master 

Use Profile, the Agency determined that 

the available data was adequate 

provided the registrants revise their 

product labels to specify a maximum 

seasonal rate of 2.0 lb dicamba ae/A and 

an 87–day preharvest interval (PHI) for 

sugarcane or submit additional data on 

sugarcane reflecting a maximum single/ 

yearly rate of 2.8 lb dicamba ae/A. In 

response to the Data Call-In (DCI) of 

June 27, 2008 that was issued to 

registrants, including the basic 

manufacturer BASF, BASF requested a 

waiver of the sugarcane study at 2.8 lb 

dicamba ae/A and cited MRID 

44089302, and accepted rate limitations 

of 1 lb dicamba ae/A for single 

application, and an annual rate 

limitation of 2 lb dicamba ae/A. The 

Agency considers that available data to 

be sufficient provided product labels 

specify a maximum seasonal rate of 2.0 

lb dicamba ae/A and an 87–day PHI for 

sugarcane. Therefore, because the 

current tolerance on sugarcane, cane at 

0.1 ppm is too low, based on the 

available data, EPA is proposing to 

increase the tolerance in 40 CFR 

180.227(a)(1) on sugarcane, cane to 0.3 

ppm. The Agency determined that the 

increased tolerance is safe; i.e., there is 

a reasonable certainty that no harm will 

result from aggregate exposure to the 

pesticide chemical residue. 

In order to describe more clearly the 

measurement and scope or coverage of 

the tolerances, EPA is proposing to 

revise the introductory text containing 

the tolerance expression in 40 CFR 

180.227(a)(1) to read as follows: 

Tolerances are established for residues of 

the herbicide dicamba, 3,6-dichloro-o-anisic 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2
28160 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 19, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

acid, including its metabolites and 

degradates, in or on the commodities in the 

table in this paragraph. Compliance with the 

tolerance levels specified in this paragraph is 

to be determined by measuring only the sum 

of dicamba, 3,6-dichloro-o-anisic acid, and 

its metabolite, 3,6-dichloro-5-hydroxy-oanisic acid, calculated as the stoichiometric 

equivalent of dicamba, in or on the 

commodity. 

In order to describe more clearly the 

measurement and scope or coverage of 

the tolerances, EPA is proposing to 

revise the introductory text containing 

the tolerance expression in 40 CFR 

180.227(a)(2) to read as follows: 

Tolerances are established for residues of 

the herbicide dicamba, 3,6-dichloro-o-anisic 

acid, including its metabolites and 

degradates, in or on the commodities in the 

table in this paragraph. Compliance with the 

tolerance levels specified in this paragraph is 

to be determined by measuring only the sum 

of dicamba, 3,6-dichloro-o-anisic acid, and 

its metabolite, 3,6-dichloro-2-hydroxybenzoic 

acid, calculated as the stoichiometric 

equivalent of dicamba, in or on the 

commodity. 

In order to describe more clearly the 

measurement and scope or coverage of 

the tolerances, EPA is proposing to 

revise the introductory text containing 

the tolerance expression in 40 CFR 

180.227(a)(3) to read as follows: 

Tolerances are established for residues of 

the herbicide dicamba, 3,6-dichloro-o-anisic 

acid, including its metabolites and 

degradates, in or on the commodities in the 

table in this paragraph. Compliance with the 

tolerance levels specified in this paragraph is 

to be determined by measuring only the sum 

of dicamba, 3,6-dichloro-o-anisic acid, and 

its metabolites, 3,6-dichloro-5-hydroxy-oanisic acid, and 3,6-dichloro-2- 

hydroxybenzoic acid, calculated as the 

stoichiometric equivalent of dicamba, in or 

on the commodity. 

There are no Codex MRLs for 

dicamba. 

4. Dicloran (DCNA). On December 2, 

2009, EPA published a notice in the 

Federal Register (74 FR 63151) (FRL– 

8800–4) that announced the Agency’s 

receipt of requests from the registrants 

to voluntarily amend certain dicloran 

registrations and therefore terminate the 

last dicloran uses on carrots. EPA 

approved amendment of the affected 

DCNA registrations by publishing a 

cancellation order on March 31, 2010 in 

the Federal Register (75 FR 16105) 

(FRL–8815–8) and made them effective 

on November 2, 2010, and permitted the 

dicloran registrant to sell and distribute 

existing dicloran stocks (concerning the 

last uses for carrots) until November 2, 

2010. For all affected dicloran products, 

the Agency permitted persons other 

than the registrant to sell and distribute 

existing stocks and use of those 

cancelled products until exhaustion. 

However, the Agency believes that end 

users will have had sufficient time to 

exhaust those existing stocks and for 

treated carrot commodities to have 

cleared the channels of trade by 

November 2, 2011. Therefore, EPA is 

proposing to revoke the tolerance in 40 

CFR 180.200(a)(1) for carrot, roots, 

postharvest with an expiration/ 

revocation date of November 2, 2011. 

In order to describe more clearly the 

measurement and scope or coverage of 

the tolerances, EPA is proposing to 

revise the introductory text containing 

the tolerance expression in 40 CFR 

180.200(a)(1) to read as follows: 

Tolerances are established for residues of 

the fungicide dicloran, 2,6-dichloro-4- 

nitroaniline, including its metabolites and 

degradates, in or on the commodities in the 

table in this paragraph. Compliance with the 

tolerance levels specified in this paragraph is 

to be determined by measuring only dicloran, 

2,6-dichloro-4-nitroaniline, in or on the 

commodity. Unless otherwise specified, 

these tolerances prescribed in this paragraph 

provide for residues from preharvest 

application only. 

There are Codex MRLs for dicloran, 

including an MRL on carrot at 15 mg/ 

kg, and MRLs on other plant 

commodities. 

5. Diquat. Currently, the only active 

registrations for diquat use on both 

sorghum grain and soybeans are for seed 

crops, and both uses have restrictions to 

not graze or feed treated forage to 

livestock and not use seed from treated 

plants for food, feed, or oil purposes. 

Given the restrictions, such uses are 

considered by the Agency to be nonfood, and therefore the tolerances are no 

longer needed and should be revoked. 

Consequently, EPA is proposing to 

revoke the tolerances in 40 CFR 

180.226(a)(1) on sorghum, grain, grain 

and soybean, seed. 

There are Codex MRLs for diquat on 

sorghum at 2 mg/kg and on soybean 

(dry) at 0.2 mg/kg. 

6. Disulfoton. On July 22, 2009, EPA 

published a notice in the Federal 

Register (74 FR 36204) (FRL–8427–2) 

that announced the Agency’s receipt of 

requests from the registrants to 

voluntarily cancel all disulfoton and 

methamidophos registrations and 

therefore terminate the last disulfoton 

and methamidophos products registered 

for use in the United States, including 

the last disulfoton uses on asparagus, 

lima and snap beans, broccoli, Brussels 

sprouts, cabbage, cauliflower, coffee, 

cotton, and lettuce. EPA approved 

cancellation of the registrations by 

publishing a cancellation order on 

September 23, 2009 in the Federal 

Register (74 FR 48551) (FRL–8437–1) 

and made them effective on September 

23, 2009, and permitted the disulfoton 

registrants to sell and distribute existing 

disulfoton stocks (concerning the last 

uses for asparagus, lima and snap beans, 

broccoli, Brussels sprouts, cabbage, 

cauliflower, cotton, and lettuce) until 

December 31, 2010 and stocks of a 

single registration (264-723) with the 

last coffee use until June 30, 2011. For 

all affected disulfoton products, the 

Agency permitted persons other than 

the registrant to sell and distribute 

existing stocks and use of those 

cancelled products until exhaustion. 

However, the Agency believes that end 

users will have had sufficient time to 

exhaust those existing stocks and for 

treated asparagus, lima and snap beans, 

broccoli, Brussels sprouts, cabbage, 

cauliflower, cotton, and lettuce 

commodities to have cleared the 

channels of trade by December 31, 2012 

and treated coffee commodities to have 

cleared the channels of trade by June 30, 

2013. Therefore, EPA is proposing to 

revoke the tolerances in 40 CFR 

180.183(a) for bean, lima; bean, snap, 

succulent; broccoli; Brussels sprouts; 

cabbage; cauliflower; cotton, undelinted 

seed; lettuce, head; and lettuce, leaf 

with expiration/revocation dates of 

December 31, 2012. Also, because there 

had been only active FIFRA section 

24(c) registrations for use of disulfoton 

on asparagus, EPA is proposing to 

revoke the regional tolerance in 40 CFR 

180.183(c) on asparagus with an 

expiration/revocation date of December 

31, 2012. In addition, EPA is proposing 

to revoke the tolerance in 40 CFR 

180.183(a) for coffee, green bean with an 

expiration/revocation date of June 30, 

2013. 

Because the tolerances for combined 

disulfoton residues of concern expired 

on October 14, 2009, EPA is proposing 

to remove the tolerances in 40 CFR 

180.183(a) on spinach and tomato. Also, 

because the tolerances for combined 

disulfoton residues of concern expired 

on January 30, 2010, EPA is proposing 

to remove the tolerances in 40 CFR 

180.183(a) on barley, grain; barley, 

straw; cattle, fat; cattle, meat; cattle, 

meat byproducts; goat, fat; goat, meat; 

goat, meat byproducts; grain, aspirated 

fractions; hog, fat; hog, meat; hog, meat 

byproducts; horse, fat; horse, meat; 

horse, meat byproducts; milk; peanut; 

pepper; potato; sheep, fat; sheep, meat; 

sheep, meat byproducts; wheat, grain; 

wheat, hay; and wheat, straw. 

In order to describe more clearly the 

measurement and scope or coverage of 

the tolerances, EPA is proposing to 

revise the section heading in 40 CFR 

180.183 from O,O-diethyl S-(2- 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 19, 2010 / Proposed Rules 28161 

(ethylthio)ethyl) phosphorodithioate to 

disulfoton and revise the introductory 

text containing the tolerance expression 

in 40 CFR 180.183(a) to read as follows: 

Tolerances are established for residues of 

the insecticide disulfoton, O,O-diethyl S-(2- 

(ethylthio)ethyl) phosphorodithioate, 

including its metabolites and degradates, in 

or on the commodities in the table in this 

paragraph. Compliance with the tolerance 

levels specified in this paragraph is to be 

determined by measuring only the sum of 

disulfoton, O,O-diethyl S-(2-(ethylthio)ethyl) 

phosphorodithioate, and its metabolites 

demeton-S,O,O-diethyl S-(2-(ethylthio)ethyl) 

phosphorothioate; disulfoton sulfoxide, O,Odiethyl S-(2-(ethylsulfinyl)ethyl) 

phosphorodithioate; disulfoton oxygen 

analog sulfoxide, O,O-diethyl S-(2- 

(ethylsulfinyl)ethyl) phosphorothioate, 

disulfoton sulfone, O,O-diethyl S-(2- 

(ethylsulfonyl)ethyl) phosphorodithioate; 

and disulfoton oxygen analog sulfone, O,Odiethyl S-(2-(ethylsulfonyl)ethyl) 

phosphorothioate; calculated as the 

stoichiometric equivalent of disulfoton, in or 

on the commodity. 

In order to describe more clearly the 

measurement and scope or coverage of 

the tolerances, EPA is proposing to 

revise the introductory text containing 

the regional tolerance expression in 40 

CFR 180.183(c) to read as follows: 

A tolerance with regional registration is 

established for residues of the insecticide 

disulfoton, O,O-diethyl S-(2-(ethylthio)ethyl) 

phosphorodithioate, including its metabolites 

and degradates, in or on the commodity in 

the table in this paragraph. Compliance with 

the tolerance levels specified in this 

paragraph is to be determined by measuring 

only the sum of disulfoton, O,O-diethyl S-(2- 

(ethylthio)ethyl) phosphorodithioate, and its 

metabolites demeton-S, O,O-diethyl S-(2- 

(ethylthio)ethyl) phosphorothioate; 

disulfoton sulfoxide, O,O-diethyl S-(2- 

(ethylsulfinyl)ethyl) phosphorodithioate; 

disulfoton oxygen analog sulfoxide, O,Odiethyl S-(2-(ethylsulfinyl)ethyl) 

phosphorothioate, disulfoton sulfone, O,Odiethyl S-(2-(ethylsulfonyl)ethyl) 

phosphorodithioate; and disulfoton oxygen 

analog sulfone, O,O-diethyl S-(2- 

(ethylsulfonyl)ethyl) phosphorothioate; 

calculated as the stoichiometric equivalent of 

disulfoton, in or on the commodity. 

There are Codex MRLs for disulfoton, 

including those on asparagus at 0.02 

mg/kg, coffee beans at 0.2 mg/kg, 

common bean (pods and/or immature 

seeds) at 0.2 mg/kg, cotton, seed at 0.1 

mg/kg, and other commodities. 

7. EPTC. Because cotton forage is no 

longer considered by the Agency to be 

a significant livestock feed commodity 

as delineated in ‘‘Table 1.—Raw 

Agricultural and Processed 

Commodities and Feedstuffs Derived 

from Crops,’’ which is found in Residue 

Chemistry Test Guidelines OPPTS 

860.1000, dated August 1996 (available 

at http://www.epa.gov/opptsfrs/ 

publications/OPPTS_Harmonized/860_

Residue_Chemistry_Test_Guidelines/ 

Series/), EPA determined that the 

tolerance is no longer needed, and 

therefore should be revoked. 

Consequently, the Agency is proposing 

to revoke the tolerance in 40 CFR 

180.117 for residues of S-ethyl 

dipropylthiocarbamate (EPTC) in or on 

cotton, forage. 

Because there have been no active Sethyl dipropylthiocarbamate 

registrations in the United States for use 

on asparagus, small fruits (including 

strawberries), flax seeds, and pineapples 

for more than 10 years, the tolerances 

are no longer needed and therefore 

should be revoked. Consequently, EPA 

is proposing to revoke the tolerances in 

40 CFR 180.117 on asparagus; fruit, 

small; strawberry; flax, seed; and 

pineapple. 

Because castor beans and oil products 

are not consumed by humans or 

livestock, EPA determined that the 

tolerance is no longer needed and 

therefore should be revoked. 

Consequently, EPA is proposing to 

revoke the tolerance in 40 CFR 180.117 

on castorbean, seed. 

EPA is proposing, in 40 CFR 180.117, 

to remove the ‘‘(N)’’ designation from all 

entries to conform to current Agency 

administrative practice (‘‘N’’ designation 

means negligible residues). Also, 

tolerances are currently established in 

40 CFR 180.117 for negligible residues 

of the herbicide S-ethyl 

dipropylthiocarbamate, also called 

EPTC. EPA determined that EPTC plant 

residues of toxicological concern are 

EPTC, EPTC sulfoxide, EPTC sulfone, 

and the EPTC conjugates (glutathione, 

cysteine, N-malonyl cysteine, S-lactic 

acid, and O-malonyl S-lactic acid 

conjugates). However, the Agency 

concurred with the registrant’s position 

that development of a single 

enforcement analytical method that can 

detect each of these residues was not 

feasible. Because development of an 

enforcement analytical method for the 

hydroxylated metabolites (S-ethyl (2- 

hydroxypropyl)propylcarbamothioate, 

S-(2-hydroxyethyl)dipropyl

carbamothioate, and S-ethyl (3- 

hydroxypropyl)propylcarbamothioate) 

was feasible, the Agency concurred with 

the registrant’s recommendation that 

EPTC and its hydroxylated metabolites 

be used as marker residues of EPTC 

residues of toxicological concern. 

Therefore, in order to describe more 

clearly the measurement and scope or 

coverage of the tolerances, EPA is 

proposing to redesignate the existing 

paragraph from 40 CFR 180.117 to 

180.117(a) and revise the introductory 

text containing the tolerance expression 

in newly designated 40 CFR 180.117(a) 

to include its hydroxylated metabolites 

as marker residues of S-ethyl 

dipropylthiocarbamate residues of 

toxicological concern (i.e., markers of 

EPTC, EPTC sulfoxide, EPTC sulfone, 

and the EPTC conjugates resulting from 

the glutathione-S-transferase pathway), 

to read as follows: 

Tolerances are established for residues of 

the herbicide S-ethyl dipropylthiocarbamate, 

including its metabolites and degradates, in 

or on the commodities in the table in this 

paragraph. Compliance with the tolerance 

levels specified in this paragraph is to be 

determined by measuring only the sum of Sethyl dipropylthiocarbamate, S-ethyl (2- 

hydroxypropyl)propylcarbamothioate, S-(2- 

hydroxyethyl)dipropylcarbamothioate, and 

S-ethyl (3- 

hydroxypropyl)propylcarbamothioate, 

calculated as the stoichiometric equivalent of 

S-ethyl dipropylthiocarbamate, in or on the 

commodity. 

The majority of the current crop 

groupings for residues of EPTC are 

based on obsolete crop groupings and, 

for many, the minimum data 

requirements for the establishment of 

crop group tolerances were not satisfied. 

Therefore, in the EPTC RED, the Agency 

recommended revocation of crop group 

tolerances, concomitant with the 

establishment of individual tolerances 

for the affected commodities. 

Based on available field trial data that 

showed residues of S-ethyl 

dipropylthiocarbamate and its 

hydroxylated metabolites were <0.09 

ppm in or on potatoes and <0.11 ppm 

in on sugar beet roots, the Agency 

determined that the tolerance for the 

obsolete group, vegetable, root, should 

be revoked and individual tolerances 

should be established for beet, garden, 

roots; beet, sugar, roots; potato; and 

sweet potato (based on translation of 

available data from potatoes). Therefore, 

EPA is proposing in newly designated 

and revised 40 CFR 180.117(a) to revoke 

the tolerance on vegetable, root at 0.1 

ppm and establish tolerances on beet, 

garden, roots at 0.1 ppm; beet, sugar, 

roots at 0.1 ppm; potato at 0.1 ppm; and 

sweet potato, roots at 0.1 ppm. Also, 

based on processing data that showed 

combined residues of EPTC and its 

hydroxylated metabolites were as high 

as <0.80 ppm in molasses that was 

processed from the raw agricultural 

commodity (sugar beet roots) with 

residues as high as <0.2 ppm (after 

application at 2X the maximum 

exposure rate), the Agency determined 

that combined residues had 

concentrated in molasses by a factor of 

4X and that after a 1X application on 

sugar beet roots, residues in molasses 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2
28162 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 19, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

would be expected at <0.1 ppm. 

Therefore, EPA is proposing to establish 

a tolerance in newly designated and 

revised 40 CFR 180.117(a) on beet, 

sugar, molasses at 0.4 ppm. 

Based on available field trial data that 

showed residues of S-ethyl 

dipropylthiocarbamate and its 

hydroxylated metabolites were nondetectable (<0.05 ppm and <0.01 ppm 

for each of the three hydroxylated 

metabolites; i.e., the Limit of 

Quantitation (LOQ) of the enforcement 

method for EPTC and its hydroxylated 

metabolites, respectively) in or on 

almond nutmeats and hulls, and walnut 

nutmeats, the Agency determined that 

the tolerance for the obsolete group, nut, 

should be revoked and individual 

tolerances should be established for 

almond, nutmeat and walnut, nutmeat; 

each at 0.08 ppm (0.05 ppm for EPTC 

and 0.03 ppm for the combined 

hydroxylated metabolites), and decrease 

almond, hulls from 0.1 ppm to 0.08 

ppm. Therefore, EPA is proposing in 

newly designated and revised 40 CFR 

180.117(a) to revoke the tolerance on 

nut at 0.1 ppm and establish tolerances 

on almond at 0.08 ppm and walnut at 

0.08 ppm, and decrease the tolerance on 

almond, hulls to 0.08 ppm. 

Based on available field trial data that 

showed residues of S-ethyl 

dipropylthiocarbamate and its 

hydroxylated metabolites were nondetectable (<0.05 ppm and <0.01 ppm 

for each of the three hydroxylated 

metabolites; i.e., the LOQ of the 

enforcement method for EPTC and its 

hydroxylated metabolites, respectively) 

in or on tomatoes, the Agency 

determined that the tolerance for the 

obsolete group, vegetable, fruiting, 

should be revoked and an individual 

tolerance should be established for 

tomato at 0.08 ppm (0.05 ppm for EPTC 

and 0.03 ppm for the combined 

hydroxylated metabolites). Therefore, 

EPA is proposing in newly designated 

and revised 40 CFR 180.117(a) to revoke 

the tolerance on vegetable, fruiting at 

0.1 ppm and establish a tolerance on 

tomato at 0.08 ppm. 

Based on available field trial data that 

showed residues of S-ethyl dipropyl

thiocarbamate were non-detectable 

(<0.05 ppm) in or on alfalfa forage and 

hay, and clover forage and hay, and 

maximum total residues of EPTC 

hydroxylated metabolites were 0.18 

ppm in or on alfalfa forage, 0.61 ppm in 

or on alfalfa hay, 0.01 ppm in or on 

clover forage, and 0.05 ppm in or on 

clover hay, the Agency determined that 

the tolerance for the obsolete group, 

legume, forage, should be revoked and 

individual tolerances should be 

established for alfalfa, forage at 0.2 ppm 

and alfalfa, hay at 0.6 ppm, clover, 

forage at 0.1 ppm, and clover, hay at 0.1 

ppm. Also, the Agency determined that 

the data for clover forage and hay can 

be translated to the forage and hay of 

trefoil and lespedeza, and therefore 

individual tolerances for each of them 

should be established at 0.1 ppm. 

Consequently, EPA is proposing in 

newly designated and revised 40 CFR 

180.117(a) to revoke the tolerance on 

legume, forage at 0.1 ppm and establish 

tolerances on alfalfa, forage at 0.2 ppm, 

alfalfa, hay at 0.6 ppm, clover, forage at 

0.1 ppm, clover, hay at 0.1 ppm, 

lespedeza, forage at 0.1 ppm, lespedeza, 

hay at 0.1 ppm, trefoil, forage at 0.1 

ppm, and trefoil, hay at 0.1 ppm. 

Based on available field trial data that 

showed residues of S-ethyl 

dipropylthiocarbamate were nondetectable (<0.05 ppm) in or on sugar 

beet tops, and maximum total residues 

of EPTC and its hydroxylated 

metabolites were <0.47 ppm in or on 

sugar beet tops, the Agency determined 

that the tolerance for the obsolete group, 

vegetable, leafy, should be revoked and 

individual tolerances should be 

established for beet, garden, tops at 0.5 

ppm and beet, sugar, tops at 0.5 ppm. 

Therefore, EPA is proposing in newly 

designated and revised 40 CFR 

180.117(a) to revoke the tolerance on 

vegetable, leafy at 0.1 ppm and establish 

tolerances on beet, garden, tops at 0.5 

ppm and beet, sugar, tops at 0.5 ppm. 

Based on available field trial data that 

showed residues of S-ethyl 

dipropylthiocarbamate and its 

hydroxylated metabolites were nondetectable (<0.05 ppm and <0.01 ppm 

for each of the three hydroxylated 

metabolites; i.e., the LOQ of the 

enforcement method for EPTC and its 

hydroxylated metabolites, respectively) 

in or on beans (succulent and dry), the 

Agency determined that the tolerance 

for the obsolete group, vegetable, seed 

and pod, should be revoked and 

individual tolerances should be 

established for bean, dry, seed; bean, 

succulent; and pea, succulent (based on 

translation of available data from 

succulent beans); each at 0.08 ppm (0.05 

ppm for EPTC and 0.03 ppm for the 

combined hydroxylated metabolites). 

Therefore, EPA is proposing in newly 

designated and revised 40 CFR 

180.117(a) to revoke the tolerance on 

vegetable, seed and pod at 0.1 ppm and 

establish tolerances on bean, dry, seed 

at 0.08 ppm, bean, succulent at 0.08 

ppm, and pea, succulent at 0.08 ppm. 

Based on available field trial data that 

showed residues of S-ethyl 

dipropylthiocarbamate and its 

hydroxylated metabolites were nondetectable (<0.05 ppm and <0.01 ppm 

for each of the three hydroxylated 

metabolites; i.e., the LOQ of the 

enforcement method for EPTC and its 

hydroxylated metabolites, respectively) 

in or on field corn grain or sweet corn 

ear, the Agency determined that the 

tolerance for the obsolete group, grain, 

crop, should be revoked, data could be 

translated from field corn grain to 

popcorn grain, and individual 

tolerances should be established for 

corn, field, grain; corn, pop, grain; and 

corn, sweet, kernel plus cob with husks 

removed; each at 0.08 ppm (0.05 ppm 

for EPTC and 0.03 ppm for the 

combined hydroxylated metabolites). 

Therefore, EPA is proposing in newly 

designated and revised 40 CFR 

180.117(a) to revoke the tolerance on 

grain, crop at 0.1 ppm and establish 

tolerances on corn, field, grain at 0.08 

ppm, corn, pop, grain at 0.08 ppm, and 

corn, sweet, kernel plus cob with husks 

removed at 0.08 ppm. 

Based on available field trial data that 

showed residues of S-ethyl 

dipropylthiocarbamate and its 

hydroxylated metabolites were nondetectable (<0.05 ppm and <0.01 ppm 

for each of the three hydroxylated 

metabolites; i.e., the LOQ of the 

enforcement method for EPTC and its 

hydroxylated metabolites, respectively) 

in or on field corn forage and stover, 

and sweet corn forage and ears, the 

Agency determined that the tolerance 

for the obsolete group, grass, forage, 

should be revoked, data could be 

translated from field corn stover to 

popcorn stover, and individual 

tolerances should be established for 

corn, field, forage; corn, field, stover; 

corn, pop, stover; corn, sweet, forage; 

and corn, sweet, stover; each at 0.08 

ppm (0.05 ppm for EPTC and 0.03 ppm 

for the combined hydroxylated 

metabolites). Therefore, EPA is 

proposing in newly designated and 

revised 40 CFR 180.117(a) to revoke the 

tolerance on grass, forage at 0.1 ppm 

and establish tolerances on corn, field, 

forage at 0.08 ppm, corn, field, stover at 

0.08 ppm, corn, pop, stover at 0.08 ppm, 

corn, sweet, forage at 0.08 ppm, and 

corn, sweet, stover at 0.08 ppm. 

Based on available field trial data that 

showed residues of S-ethyl 

dipropylthiocarbamate and its 

hydroxylated metabolites were nondetectable (<0.05 ppm and <0.01 ppm 

for each of the three hydroxylated 

metabolites; i.e., the LOQ of the 

enforcement method for EPTC and its 

hydroxylated metabolites, respectively) 

in or on cottonseed, safflower seeds, and 

sunflower seeds, the Agency determined 

that the tolerances on cottonseed, 

safflower seed, and sunflower seed 

should be decreased from 0.1 to 0.08 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 19, 2010 / Proposed Rules 28163 

ppm (0.05 ppm for EPTC and 0.03 ppm 

for the combined hydroxylated 

metabolites). Therefore, EPA is 

proposing in newly designated and 

revised 40 CFR 180.117(a) to decrease 

the tolerances on cotton, undelinted 

seed to 0.08 ppm; safflower, seed to 0.08 

ppm; and sunflower, seed to 0.08 ppm. 

Based on available field trial data that 

showed residues of S-ethyl 

dipropylthiocarbamate and its 

hydroxylated metabolites were <0.05 

ppm for EPTC and each of the three 

hydroxylated metabolites (total 

combined residues were <0.20 ppm) in 

or on cotton gin byproducts, the Agency 

determined that a tolerance should be 

established at 0.20 ppm. Therefore, EPA 

is proposing in newly designated and 

revised 40 CFR 180.117(a) to establish a 

tolerance on cotton, gin byproducts at 

0.20 ppm. 

In accordance with current Agency 

practice, EPA is proposing to revise 40 

CFR 180.117 by adding separate 

paragraphs (b), (c), and (d), and 

reserving those paragraphs with 

tolerance exemptions for section 18 

emergency exemptions, tolerances with 

regional registrations, and tolerances 

with indirect or inadvertent residues, 

respectively. Also EPA is proposing to 

revise the nomenclature and tolerance 

in newly designated and revised 40 CFR 

180.117(a) from ‘‘fruit, citrus’’ to ‘‘fruit, 

citrus, group 10.’’ 

There are no Codex MRLs for EPTC. 

8. Ethoprop. On May 27, 2009, EPA 

published a notice in the Federal 

Register (74 FR 25237) (FRL–8418–2) 

that announced the Agency’s receipt of 

request from the registrant to voluntarily 

amend a registration and therefore 

terminate the last ethoprop use in the 

United States on pineapple. EPA 

approved amendment of the registration 

by issuing a cancellation order on July 

9, 2009 to the registrant, made it 

effective on July 23, 2009, and permitted 

the registrant to sell and distribute 

existing ethoprop stocks of the amended 

registration (concerning pineapple use 

deletion) for 18 months after July 9, 

2009; i.e., until January 9, 2011. The 

Agency permitted persons other than 

the registrant to sell and distribute 

existing stocks and use of the affected 

ethoprop product until exhaustion. 

However, the Agency believes that end 

users will have had sufficient time to 

exhaust those existing stocks and for 

ethoprop treated pineapple 

commodities to have cleared the 

channels of trade by January 9, 2012. 

Therefore, EPA is proposing to revoke 

the tolerance in 40 CFR 180.262(a) for 

pineapple with an expiration/revocation 

date of January 9, 2012. 

Because there have been no active 

registrations in the United States for 

ethoprop use on popcorn for more than 

10 years, and therefore, tolerances 

covering popcorn use are no longer 

needed, EPA is proposing to revoke the 

tolerances in 40 CFR 180.262(a) on corn, 

pop, grain and corn, pop, stover. 

In order to describe more clearly the 

measurement and scope or coverage of 

the tolerances, EPA is proposing to 

revise the introductory text containing 

the tolerance expression in 40 CFR 

180.262(a) to read as follows: 

Tolerances are established for residues of 

the nematocide and insecticide ethoprop, Oethyl S,S-dipropyl phosphorodithioate, 

including its metabolites and degradates, in 

or on the commodities in the table in this 

paragraph. Compliance with the tolerance 

levels specified in this paragraph is to be 

determined by measuring only ethoprop, Oethyl S,S-dipropyl phosphorodithioate, in or 

on the commodity. 

There are no Codex MRLs for 

ethoprophos on pineapple or corn, but 

there are MRLs for ethoprophos on other 

commodities. 

9. Fenamiphos. There have been no 

active food use registrations for 

fenamiphos in the United States since 

2007. In a proposed rule that EPA 

published in the Federal Register on 

February 6, 2008 (73 FR 6867) (FRL– 

8345–2), the Agency proposed specific 

tolerances for multiple pesticide active 

ingredients, including fenamiphos, and 

stated that Bayer CropScience informed 

the Agency that it would support 

fenamiphos tolerances on citrus and 

garlic, among others, for import 

purposes since there were no active 

domestic registrations for those uses. In 

January 2010, Bayer CropScience 

informed EPA that it no longer was 

interested in supporting import 

tolerances for residues of fenamiphos in 

or on citrus and garlic, but would 

continue to support import tolerances 

for residues of fenamiphos in or on 

banana, grape, and pineapple. Because 

no one other than Bayer CropScience 

expressed an interest in retaining the 

fenamiphos tolerances on citrus and 

garlic, there is no longer a need for 

them. Therefore, EPA is proposing to 

revoke the tolerances in 40 CFR 

180.349(a) on citrus, dried pulp; citrus, 

oil; fruit, citrus, group 10; and garlic; 

add a missing footnote to the tolerance 

for grape, raisin to reflect that it has no 

U.S. registrations, and revise the 

footnoted information for all remaining 

tolerances to reflect the effective 

cancellation date of the last fenamiphos 

registrations in the United States to be 

as of May 31, 2007. 

Because the tolerances expired on 

December 31, 2009, EPA is proposing to 

remove the tolerances in 40 CFR 

180.349(a) on apple; Brussels sprouts; 

cabbage; cherry, sweet; cherry, tart; 

eggplant; okra; peach; peanut; raspberry; 

and strawberry; in 180.349(c) on 

asparagus; beet, garden, roots; beet, 

garden, tops; cabbage, Chinese, bok 

choy; kiwifruit; and pepper, nonbell; 

and reserve paragraph (c). 

Also, in order to describe more clearly 

the measurement and scope or coverage 

of the tolerances, EPA is proposing to 

revise the introductory text containing 

the tolerance expression in 40 CFR 

180.349(a) to read as follows: 

Tolerances are established for residues of 

the nematicide/insecticide fenamiphos, ethyl 

3-methyl-4-(methylthio)phenyl 1- 

(methylethyl)phosphoramidate, including its 

metabolites and degradates, in or on the 

commodities in the table in this paragraph. 

Compliance with the tolerance levels 

specified in this paragraph is to be 

determined by measuring only the sum of 

fenamiphos, ethyl 3-methyl-4- 

(methylthio)phenyl 1- 

(methylethyl)phosphoramidate, and its 

cholinesterase inhibiting metabolites ethyl 3- 

methyl-4-(methylsulfinyl)phenyl 1- 

(methylethyl)phosphoramidate and ethyl 3- 

methyl-4-(methylsulfonyl)phenyl 1- 

(methylethyl)phosphoramidate, calculated as 

the stoichiometric equivalent of fenamiphos, 

in or on the commodity. 

There are Codex MRLs for 

fenamiphos, including those on apple; 

banana; Brussels sprouts; cabbages, 

head; and peanut at 0.05 mg/kg, and 

other commodities. 

10. Hexazinone. Currently, tolerances 

are expressed for the herbicide 

hexazinone in 40 CFR 180.396(a)(1) for 

the combined residues of hexazinone (3- 

cyclohexyl-6-(dimethylamino)-1- 

methyl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4-(1H, 3H)- 

dione) and its plant metabolites; A (3- 

(4-hydroxycyclohexyl)-6- 

(dimethylamino)-1-methyl-1,3,5- 

triazine-2,4-(1H, 3H)-dione, B (3- 

cyclohexyl-6-(methylamino)-1-methyl1,3,5-triazine-2,4-(1H, 3H)-dione), C (3- 

(4-hydroxycyclohexyl)-6- 

(methylamino)-1-methyl-1,3,5-triazine2,4-(1H, 3H)-dione), D (3-cyclohexyl)-1- 

methyl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4,6-(1H, 3H, 5H)- 

trione), and E (3-(4-hydroxycyclohexyl)- 

1-methyl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4,6-(1H, 3H, 

5H)-trione) (calculated as hexazinone). 

In order to describe more clearly the 

measurement and scope or coverage of 

the tolerances, EPA is proposing to 

revise the introductory text containing 

the tolerance expression in 40 CFR 

180.396(a)(1) to read as follows: 

Tolerances are established for residues of 

the herbicide hexazinone, 3-cyclohexyl-6- 

(dimethylamino)-1-methyl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4- 

(1H, 3H)-dione, including its metabolites and 

degradates, in or on the commodities in the 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2
28164 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 19, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

table in this paragraph. Compliance with the 

tolerance levels specified in this paragraph is 

to be determined by measuring only the sum 

of hexazinone, 3-cyclohexyl-6- 

(dimethylamino)-1-methyl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4- 

(1H, 3H)-dione, and its plant metabolites: 

metabolite A, 3-(4-hydroxycyclohexyl)-6- 

(dimethylamino)-1-methyl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4- 

(1H, 3H)-dione, metabolite B, 3-cyclohexyl-6- 

(methylamino)-1-methyl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4- 

(1H, 3H)-dione, metabolite C, 3-(4- 

hydroxycyclohexyl)-6-(methylamino)-1- 

methyl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4-(1H, 3H)-dione, 

metabolite D, 3-cyclohexyl-1-methyl-1,3,5- 

triazine-2,4,6-(1H, 3H, 5H)-trione, and 

metabolite E, 3-(4-hydroxycyclohexyl)-1- 

methyl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4,6-(1H, 3H, 5H)- 

trione, calculated as the stoichiometric 

equivalent of hexazinone, in or on the 

commodity. 

Based on available field trial data that 

showed combined hexazinone residues 

of concern as high as 183 ppm in or on 

grass forage at a 0–day PHI and 133 ppm 

in or on grass, hay at a 14 to 38–day 

PHI, EPA determined that the tolerance 

for grass forage should be increased 

from 10 to 250 ppm, and a tolerance for 

grass hay should be established at 230 

ppm. Therefore, EPA is proposing to 

increase the tolerance in 40 CFR 

180.396(a)(1) on grass, forage to 250 

ppm and establish a tolerance in 40 CFR 

180.396(a)(1) on grass, hay at 230 ppm. 

The Agency determined that the 

increased tolerance is safe; i.e., there is 

a reasonable certainty that no harm will 

result from aggregate exposure to the 

pesticide chemical residue. 

Based on available field trial data that 

showed combined hexazinone residues 

of concern as high as <3.33 ppm in or 

on alfalfa hay, EPA determined that the 

tolerance on alfalfa hay should be 

decreased from 8.0 to 4.0 ppm. 

Therefore, the Agency is proposing in 

40 CFR 180.396(a)(1) to decrease the 

tolerance on alfalfa, hay to 4.0 ppm. 

In order to describe more clearly the 

measurement and scope or coverage of 

the tolerances, EPA is proposing to 

revise the introductory text containing 

the tolerance expression in 40 CFR 

180.396(a)(2) to read as follows: 

Tolerances are established for residues of 

the herbicide hexazinone, 3-cyclohexyl-6- 

(dimethylamino)-1-methyl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4- 

(1H, 3H)-dione, including its metabolites and 

degradates, in or on the commodities in the 

table in this paragraph. Compliance with the 

tolerance levels specified in this paragraph is 

to be determined by measuring only the sum 

of hexazinone, 3-cyclohexyl-6- 

(dimethylamino)-1-methyl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4- 

(1H, 3H)-dione, and its animal tissue 

metabolites: metabolite B, 3-cyclohexyl-6- 

(methylamino)-1-methyl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4- 

(1H, 3H)-dione, and metabolite F, 3- 

cyclohexyl-6-amino-1-methyl-1,3,5-triazine2,4-(1H, 3H)-dione, calculated as the 

stoichiometric equivalent of hexazinone, in 

or on the commodity. 

In order to describe more clearly the 

measurement and scope or coverage of 

the tolerances, EPA is proposing to 

revise the introductory text containing 

the tolerance expression in 40 CFR 

180.396(a)(3) to read as follows: 

A tolerance is established for residues of 

the herbicide hexazinone, 3-cyclohexyl-6- 

(dimethylamino)-1-methyl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4- 

(1H, 3H)-dione, including its metabolites and 

degradates, in or on the commodity in the 

table in this paragraph. Compliance with the 

tolerance level specified in this paragraph is 

to be determined by measuring only the sum 

of hexazinone, 3-cyclohexyl-6- 

(dimethylamino)-1-methyl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4- 

(1H, 3H)-dione, and its metabolites: 

metabolite B, 3-cyclohexyl-6-(methylamino)- 

1-methyl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4-(1H, 3H)-dione, 

metabolite C, 3-(4-hydroxycyclohexyl)-6- 

(methylamino)-1-methyl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4- 

(1H, 3H)-dione, metabolite C-2, 3-(3- 

hydroxycyclohexyl)-6-(methylamino)-1- 

methyl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4-(1H, 3H)-dione, and 

metabolite F, 3-cyclohexyl-6-amino-1- 

methyl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4-(1H, 3H)-dione, 

calculated as the stoichiometric equivalent of 

hexazinone, in or on the commodity. 

In the Federal Register of September 

27, 2006 (71 FR 56392) (FRL–8089–6), 

EPA published a final tolerance rule for 

several active pesticide ingredients, 

including hexazinone. Because the 

Agency received a comment from 

DuPont Crop Protection which stated 

that it would be submitting grass 

residue data and expected increased 

residues that would warrant revision of 

existing tolerances for both grass and 

hay as livestock feed commodities, EPA 

did not finalize revocation of certain 

livestock tolerances for hexazinone, in 

40 CFR 180.396, at that time. Upon 

review of the submitted data, EPA has 

determined that tolerances on the fat of 

cattle, goats, hogs, horses, and sheep 

should be maintained at 0.1 ppm. 

However, based on available field trial 

data for grass and hay, and a 

recalculation of dietary burden that 

show the maximum total hexazinone 

residues were 3.85 ppm in liver, 2.19 

ppm in kidney, 0.32 ppm in muscle, 

<0.1 ppm in fat, and 11.09 ppm in milk, 

the Agency determined that meat 

byproduct tolerances of cattle, goats, 

hogs, horses, and sheep should be 

increased from 0.1 to 4.0 ppm; meat 

tolerances of cattle, goats, hogs, horses, 

and sheep should be increased from 0.1 

to 0.5 ppm, and the milk tolerance 

should be increased from 0.2 to 11 ppm. 

Therefore, EPA is proposing to increase 

the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.396(a)(2) 

on cattle, meat byproducts; goat, meat 

byproducts; hog, meat byproducts; 

horse, meat byproducts; and sheep, 

meat byproducts; each to 4.0 ppm; and 

on cattle, meat; goat, meat; hog, meat; 

horse, meat; and sheep, meat; each to 

0.5 ppm. Also, EPA is proposing to 

increase the tolerance in 40 CFR 

180.396(a)(3) on milk to 11 ppm. The 

Agency determined that the increased 

tolerances are safe; i.e., there is a 

reasonable certainty that no harm will 

result from aggregate exposure to the 

pesticide chemical residue. 

Also, in the Federal Register of 

September 27, 2006 (71 FR 56392), EPA 

agreed with a comment from DuPont 

Crop Protection which stated that 

registrations for use of hexazinone on 

sugarcane in Florida are active and that 

the current regional tolerances for 

sugarcane be designated as general 

tolerances. Therefore, EPA is proposing 

to revoke the regional tolerances in 40 

CFR 180.396(c) on sugarcane, cane at 

0.6 ppm and sugarcane, molasses at 4.0 

ppm, reserve paragraph (c) for 

tolerances with regional registrations, 

and establish tolerances in 40 CFR 

180.396(a)(1) on sugarcane, cane at 0.6 

ppm and sugarcane, molasses at 4.0 

ppm. 

There are no Codex MRLs for 

hexazinone. 

11. Malathion. Based on available 

ruminant and poultry metabolism data 

at exaggerated feeding rates of 

malathion–treated livestock feeds and 

that no active registrations for direct 

animal treatment with malathion have 

existed since March 2005, EPA 

determined that there is no reasonable 

expectation of finite residues of 

malathion in fat, meat, and meat 

byproducts of cattle, goats, hogs, horses, 

poultry, and sheep; milk fat; and eggs. 

These tolerances are no longer needed 

under 40 CFR 180.6(a)(3). Therefore, 

EPA is proposing to revoke the 

tolerances in 40 CFR 180.111(a)(3) for 

residues of malathion in or on egg; milk, 

fat; cattle, fat; cattle, meat; cattle, meat 

byproducts; goat, fat; goat, meat; goat, 

meat byproducts; hog, fat; hog, meat; 

hog, meat byproducts; horse, fat; horse, 

meat; horse, meat byproducts; poultry, 

fat; poultry, meat; poultry, meat 

byproducts; sheep, fat; sheep, meat; and 

sheep, meat byproducts; and therefore, 

remove paragraph (a)(3) in its entirety, 

including its footnote. 

On May 20, 2009, EPA published a 

notice in the Federal Register (74 FR 

23708) (FRL–8414–2) that announced 

the Agency’s receipt of requests from 

the registrants to voluntarily cancel or 

amend specific malathion registrations 

and therefore terminate specific uses, 

including the last use on cranberries for 

malathion products registered for use in 

the United States. EPA approved 

cancellation of these registrations and 

uses by publishing a cancellation order 

on July 15, 2009 in the Federal Register 

(74 FR 34345) (FRL–8425–3) and made 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 19, 2010 / Proposed Rules 28165 

them effective on July 15, 2009, and 

permitted the malathion registrants, 

including the registrant who requested 

to amend to terminate the use on 

cranberry, to sell and distribute existing 

malathion stocks (concerning the last 

use for cranberry) for 1 year from the 

effective date of July 15, 2009; i.e., until 

July 15, 2010. The Agency permitted 

persons other than the registrant to sell 

and distribute existing stocks and use of 

those cancelled products until 

exhaustion. However, the Agency 

believes that end users will have had 

sufficient time to exhaust those existing 

stocks and for treated cranberry 

commodities to have cleared the 

channels of trade by July 15, 2011. 

Therefore, EPA is proposing to revoke 

the tolerance in 40 CFR 180.111(a)(1) on 

cranberry with an expiration/revocation 

date of July 15, 2011. 

Based on available processing data 

that showed combined residues of 

malathion and malaoxon on whole 

grapes were higher than those on raisins 

from pre-harvest grapes treated at 5X the 

maximum single application rate, the 

Agency determined that malathion 

residues of concern did not concentrate 

in raisins. Also, while there are active 

registrations for the pre-harvest use of 

malathion on grapes, covered by the 

tolerance on grapes at 8 ppm in 40 CFR 

180.111(a)(1), there have been no active 

malathion registrations in the United 

States for malathion use on raisins or 

paper trays for drying grapes to raisins 

for more than 10 years. Therefore, the 

tolerance in currently existing 40 CFR 

180.111(a)(4) on raisin at 12 ppm is no 

longer needed and should be revoked. 

Consequently, EPA is proposing to 

revoke the tolerance in currently 

existing 40 CFR 180.111(a)(4) on raisins 

at 12 ppm resulting from drying of grape 

on treated trays and from application to 

grape before harvest, and remove 

paragraphs (a)(4) and (a)(6) in their 

entireties. 

Because there have been no active 

malathion registrations in the United 

States for use on paper used in 

packaging non-medicated cattle feed 

concentrate blocks since 1997, use on 

bagged citrus pulp since 1997, use on 

sunflower commodities since 2002, 

safflower commodities since 2003, and 

peanut commodities since early 2007, 

the tolerances are no longer needed and 

therefore should be revoked. 

Consequently, EPA is proposing to 

revoke the tolerances in 40 CFR 

180.111(a)(1) on sunflower, seed, 

postharvest; safflower, seed; peanut, 

hay; peanut, postharvest; the tolerance 

in currently existing 40 CFR 

180.111(a)(5) on safflower, refined oil, 

and remove paragraph (a)(5) in its 

entirety; and the tolerances in currently 

existing 40 CFR 180.111(a)(7)(i) on 

citrus, dried pulp as the result of the 

application to bagged citrus pulp during 

storage, and in currently existing 40 

CFR 180.111(a)(7)(ii) on non-medicated 

cattle feed concentrate blocks as the 

result of application to paper used in its 

packaging, and remove paragraph (a)(7) 

in its entirety. 

In order to conform to current Agency 

practice in 40 CFR 180.111(a)(1), EPA is 

proposing to revise the commodity 

terminology from ‘‘bean, dry seed’’ to 

‘‘bean, dry, seed.’’ 

There are no Codex MRLs for 

malathion on egg, milk, or animal 

commodities; however, there are Codex 

MRLs for malathion on citrus fruits and 

other specific plant commodities. 

12. Methamidophos. On July 22, 2009, 

EPA published a notice in the Federal 

Register (74 FR 36204) (FRL–8427–2) 

that announced the Agency’s receipt of 

requests from the registrants to 

voluntarily cancel all disulfoton and 

methamidophos registrations and 

therefore terminate the last disulfoton 

and methamidophos products registered 

for use in the United States, including 

the last methamidophos uses on cotton, 

potato, and tomato. EPA approved 

cancellation of the registrations by 

publishing a cancellation order on 

September 23, 2009 in the Federal 

Register (74 FR 48551) (FRL–8437–1) 

and made them effective on September 

23, 2009, and permitted the 

methamidophos registrant to sell and 

distribute existing methamidophos 

stocks (concerning cotton, potato, and 

tomato use) until December 31, 2010. 

For all affected methamidophos 

products, the Agency permitted persons 

other than the registrant to sell and 

distribute existing stocks and use of 

those cancelled products until 

exhaustion. However, the Agency 

believes that end users will have had 

sufficient time to exhaust those existing 

stocks and for treated cotton, potato, 

and tomato commodities to have cleared 

the channels of trade by December 31, 

2012. Therefore, EPA is proposing to 

revoke the tolerances in 40 CFR 

180.315(a) on cotton, undelinted seed, 

potato, and tomato with expiration/ 

revocation dates of December 31, 2012. 

Also, because the last registrations for 

use of methamidophos on tomatoes 

were FIFRA section 24(c) registrations 

and there are no active registrations for 

use of acephate on tomatoes, the Agency 

has determined that the tomato 

tolerance should be redesignated as a 

regional tolerance. In addition, on May 

23, 2007 (72 FR 28912) (FRL–8130–8), 

EPA published a proposed rule in the 

Federal Register concerning a number 

of pesticide active ingredients and 

proposed tolerance actions, including 

the proposed recodification of the 

methamidophos tolerance in 40 CFR 

180.315 on tomato as a regional 

tolerance and an increase from 1.0 to 2.0 

ppm based on data that showed residues 

as high as 1.4 ppm. During the public 

comment period, the Agency received 

comment from the California 

Department of Pesticide Regulation 

(CDPR), who asked that the tolerance in 

40 CFR 180.315 on tomato be decreased 

to 0.3 ppm in order to be health 

protective. The suggested decrease was 

based on CDPR’s dietary risk 

assessments for methamidophos at the 

95th percentile for exposure and a 

tolerance level of 1 ppm, and not using 

a percent crop treated (PCT) adjustment 

for tomato. On September 26, 2007 (72 

FR 54574) (FRL–8147–6), EPA 

published a final rule in the Federal 

Register in follow-up to the proposed 

rule of May 23, 2007 (72 FR 28912) and 

announced that it would not take action 

on methamidophos tolerances at that 

time based upon comments and issues 

concerning several commodities. 

However, EPA estimates dietary risks 

based on tolerance levels only as a 

screening tool. If risks are unacceptable 

using tolerance levels, a number of 

refinements can be made including the 

use of the entire distribution of field 

trial data, monitoring data, average 

residue levels for blended commodities, 

and PCT data. When using PCT data in 

dietary risk assessment, it is the 

Agency’s policy to regulate at a higher 

percentile of exposure, typically the 

99.9th percentile, to assure protection of 

public health. Using these refinements 

provides more accurate estimates of the 

level of pesticide residues present at the 

time of consumption and therefore more 

realistic dietary risk estimates. Since 

tolerances are established based solely 

on the available field trial residue data, 

and dietary risks can be refined in the 

ways described, which are not 

necessarily directly correlated with the 

tolerance level, the Agency does not 

agree that decreasing the current 

tolerance for tomato will provide any 

additional health protection. The 

Agency believes that the recommended 

tolerance of 2.0 ppm on tomato and the 

dietary risk assessment performed for 

methamidophos are protective of public 

health. Therefore, the Agency is 

proposing to redesignate 40 CFR 

180.315(b) as 40 CFR 180.315(c), remove 

the tolerance on tomato from 40 CFR 

180.315(a) and transfer it to newly 

designated and revised 40 CFR 

180.315(c), revoke the tolerance on 

tomato with an expiration/revocation 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2
28166 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 19, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

date of December 31, 2012, and increase 

the tolerance from 1.0 to 2.0 ppm. The 

Agency determined that the increased 

tolerance is safe; i.e., there is a 

reasonable certainty that no harm will 

result from aggregate exposure to the 

pesticide chemical residue. 

Also, currently, tolerances for the 

insecticide methamidophos are 

expressed in 40 CFR 180.315(a) and 

newly designated and revised 

180.315(c) for residues of 

methamidophos, O,S-dimethyl 

phosphoramidothioate. In order to 

describe more clearly the measurement 

and scope or coverage of the tolerances, 

EPA is proposing to revise the 

introductory text containing the 

tolerance expression in 40 CFR 

180.315(a) to read as follows: 

Tolerances are established for residues of 

methamidophos, O,S-dimethyl 

phosphoramidothioate, including its 

metabolites and degradates, in or on the 

commodities in the table in this paragraph as 

a result of the application of methamidophos. 

Compliance with the tolerance levels 

specified in this paragraph is to be 

determined by measuring only 

methamidophos, O,S-dimethyl 

phosphoramidothioate, in or on the 

commodity. 

In addition, EPA is proposing to 

revise the introductory text containing 

the tolerance expression in newly 

designated and revised 40 CFR 

180.315(c) to read as follows: 

A tolerance with a regional registration is 

established for residues of methamidophos, 

O,S-dimethyl phosphoramidothioate, 

including its metabolites and degradates, in 

or on the commodity in the table in this 

paragraph as a result of the application of 

methamidophos. Compliance with the 

tolerance level specified in this paragraph is 

to be determined by measuring only 

methamidophos, O,S-dimethyl 

phosphoramidothioate, in or on the 

commodity. 

Because there are no active 

registrations in the United States for 

methamidophos on Brussels sprouts and 

cauliflower since 1989; celery since 

1998; and lettuce and peppers since 

2001; the tolerances are no longer 

needed and therefore should be 

revoked. Consequently, EPA is 

proposing to revoke the tolerances in 40 

CFR 180.315(a) on Brussels sprouts; 

cauliflower; lettuce; and pepper; and the 

regional tolerance in newly designated 

and revised 40 CFR 180.315(c) on 

celery. 

On May 23, 2007 (72 FR 28912), EPA 

published a proposed rule in the 

Federal Register concerning a number 

of pesticide active ingredients and 

proposed tolerance actions, including 

the proposed revocation of 

methamidophos tolerances in 40 CFR 

180.315 on broccoli and cabbage 

because there are no active registrations 

for uses of either methamidophos or 

acephate on broccoli and cabbage in the 

United States and therefore, the 

tolerances were no longer needed. 

However, during the public comment 

period, the Agency received comment 

from Bayer CropScience Inc. and the 

Canadian Horticultural Council, who 

each asked that the tolerances in 40 CFR 

180.315 on broccoli and cabbage not be 

revoked to allow continuation of the 

importation of methamidophos-treated 

broccoli and cabbage commodities from 

Canada into the United States. On 

September 26, 2007 (72 FR 54574), EPA 

published a final rule in the Federal 

Register in follow-up to the proposed 

rule of May 23, 2007 and announced 

that it would not take action on 

methamidophos tolerances at that time. 

Since then, Bayer CropScience Inc. has 

notified the Agency of a phase-out 

schedule they negotiated with the Pest 

Management Regulatory Agency 

(PMRA) in Canada where the last date 

of methamidophos product sale 

(Monitor 480) by Bayer CropScience Inc. 

is December 31, 2010, last date of 

methamidophos product sale (Monitor 

480) by retailers is December 31, 2011, 

and last date of permitted use and 

expiration of Monitor 480 registration in 

Canada is December 31, 2012. In 

addition, Bayer CropScience Inc. has 

requested that EPA maintain U.S. 

tolerances on broccoli and cabbage until 

December 31, 2012 in order to allow 

imports into the U.S. of broccoli and 

cabbage treated with methamidophos 

product. Therefore, EPA is proposing to 

revoke the tolerances in 40 CFR 

180.315(a) on broccoli and cabbage with 

expiration/revocation dates of December 

31, 2012. 

In accordance with current Agency 

practice, EPA is proposing to revise 40 

CFR 180.315 by adding paragraphs (b) 

and (d), and reserving those paragraphs 

for tolerances with section 18 

emergency exemptions and indirect or 

inadvertent residues, respectively. 

There are Codex MRLs for 

methamidophos, including those on 

cottonseed at 0.2 mg/kg and potato at 

0.05 mg/kg, and other commodities. 

13. Methomyl. On April 25, 2007, EPA 

published a notice in the Federal 

Register (72 FR 20541) (FRL–8125–6) 

that announced the Agency’s receipt of 

requests from the registrants for 

amendments to delete uses, including 

the last methomyl uses on strawberry. 

After a 180–day public comment period, 

EPA approved the use deletions and 

made them effective on March 10, 2008, 

and permitted the methomyl registrant 

to sell and distribute existing methomyl 

stocks (concerning strawberry use) for a 

period of 18 months after approval of 

the revision; i.e., until September 10, 

2009. For all affected methomyl 

products, the Agency permitted persons 

other than the registrant to sell and 

distribute existing stocks and use of 

those cancelled products until 

exhaustion. However, the Agency 

believes that end users will have had 

sufficient time to exhaust those existing 

stocks and for treated strawberry 

commodities to have cleared the 

channels of trade by September 10, 

2010. Therefore, EPA is proposing to 

revoke the tolerance in 40 CFR 

180.253(a) on strawberry on the date a 

final rule, in follow-up to this proposed 

rule, publishes in the Federal Register 

(which the Agency expects to occur 

after September 10, 2010). In addition, 

there have been no active food-use 

registrations for use of methomyl on 

leeks for more than 10 years and 

watercress since 1991, and therefore the 

tolerances are no longer needed and 

should be revoked. Consequently, EPA 

is proposing to revoke the tolerances in 

40 CFR 180.253(a) on leek and 

watercress. 

There are no Codex MRLs on leek, 

strawberry, or watercress for methomyl. 

14. Methyl bromide. On September 

30, 2009, EPA published a notice in the 

Federal Register (74 FR 50199) (FRL– 

8792–8) that announced the Agency’s 

receipt of requests from the registrants 

for amendments to delete uses, 

including the last methyl bromide 

postharvest uses on alfalfa hay and 

cottonseed. On February 3, 2010 (75 FR 

5582) (FRL–8805–9), EPA approved the 

use deletions and made them effective 

on February 3, 2010, and permitted the 

methyl bromide registrant to sell and 

distribute existing methyl bromide 

stocks (concerning alfalfa hay and 

cottonseed postharvest uses) until 

October 31, 2009. For all affected 

methyl bromide products, the Agency 

permitted persons other than the 

registrant to sell and distribute existing 

stocks until October 31, 2010, and use 

of those cancelled products until 

exhaustion. However, the Agency 

believes that end users will have had 

sufficient time to exhaust those existing 

stocks and for treated alfalfa hay and 

cottonseed commodities to have cleared 

the channels of trade by October 31, 

2011. Therefore, EPA is proposing to 

revoke the tolerances in 40 CFR 

180.123(a)(1) on alfalfa, hay, postharvest 

and cotton, undelinted seed, postharvest 

with expiration/revocation dates of 

October 31, 2011. 

Because there have been no active 

methyl bromide registrations in the 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 19, 2010 / Proposed Rules 28167 

United States for postharvest use on 

mangos and papayas for more than 10 

years, the tolerances are no longer 

needed and therefore should be 

revoked. Consequently, EPA is 

proposing to revoke the tolerances in 40 

CFR 180.123(a)(1) on mango, 

postharvest and papaya, postharvest. 

Also, because there have been no active 

methyl bromide registrations in the 

United States for postharvest use on 

timothy hay since October 19, 2009, 

when one FIFRA section 24(c), special 

local need registration in California was 

amended to delete use on timothy hay, 

the tolerance is no longer needed and 

therefore should be revoked. The 

Agency believes that there will be 

sufficient time for product in channels 

of trade to be distributed and sold to 

users and for end users to exhaust those 

existing stocks and for treated timothy 

hay commodities to have cleared the 

channels of trade by October 19, 2010. 

Consequently, EPA is proposing to 

revoke the tolerance in 40 CFR 

180.123(a)(1) on timothy, hay, 

postharvest with an expiration/ 

revocation date of October 19, 2010. 

While there are no Codex MRLs for 

methyl bromide, there are MRLs for the 

bromide ion on specific commodities, 

but none on alfalfa, cottonseed, mango, 

papaya, or timothy hay. 

15. N-octyl bicycloheptene 

dicarboximide (MGK-264). Currently, 

there are tolerances in 40 CFR 

180.367(a)(2) for residues of MGK-264, 

piperonyl butoxide, and pyrethrins at 10 

ppm, 10 ppm, and 1 ppm, respectively, 

when these pesticides are used in 

combination in or on food resulting 

from applications in food-processing 

and food-storage areas, provided that 

the food is removed or covered prior to 

such use. Based on available residue 

data for uncovered bagged foods that 

showed levels of MGK-264 at <5.0 ppm, 

the Agency determined that the 

tolerance for residues of MGK-264 in or 

on food in food-processing and foodstorage areas (where food is removed or 

covered prior to MGK-264 treatment) 

should be decreased from 10 ppm to 5 

ppm, that bagged foods in warehouse 

storage need not be removed or covered 

prior to applications of formulations 

containing MGK-264, and that while 

covered or removed foods in food 

processing/handling establishments are 

not likely to have detectable residues of 

MGK-264, uncovered foods showed 

residues at >5 ppm. Also, given that a 

proposed food handling establishment 

tolerance of 5 ppm in 40 CFR 

180.367(a)(2) would cover the 

individual fat tolerances for residues 

resulting from dermal application at 0.3 

ppm in § 180.367(a)(1), the Agency 

determined that there is no longer a 

need for the fat tolerances at 0.3 ppm 

and they should be revoked. In addition, 

because tolerances for residues in or on 

food from applications in foodprocessing and food-storage areas 

currently exist in 40 CFR 

180.127(a)(2)(iii) for piperonyl butoxide 

at 10 ppm and in 40 CFR 180.128(a)(3) 

for pyrethrins at 1.0 ppm, the Agency 

determined that the tolerances for 

piperonyl butoxide and pyrethrins in 40 

CFR 180.367(a)(2) are duplicates which 

are no longer needed and should be 

revoked since the use would be covered 

by the other tolerances. Therefore, EPA 

is proposing to revoke the tolerances at 

0.3 ppm in 40 CFR 180.367(a)(1) for Noctyl bicycloheptene dicarboximide 

residues resulting from dermal 

application in or on cattle, fat; goat, fat; 

hog, fat; horse, fat; milk, fat; and sheep, 

fat; and remove existing paragraph (a)(1) 

in its entirety, revoke the tolerances for 

piperonyl butoxide at 10 ppm and 

pyrethrins at 1 ppm in 40 CFR 

180.367(a)(2)(ii), remove existing 

introductory text in 40 CFR 

180.367(a)(2), (a)(2)(i), and (a)(2)(iii); 

decrease the tolerance in 40 CFR 

180.367(a)(2)(ii) to 5 ppm and 

redesignate it as 40 CFR 180.367(a), and 

revise newly designated paragraph (a), 

as follows: 

A tolerance of 5 parts per million is 

established for residues of the insecticide 

synergist N-octyl bicycloheptene 

dicarboximide, including its metabolites and 

degradates, in or on all food items in food 

handling establishments where food and food 

products are held, processed, prepared and/ 

or served, provided that the food is removed 

or covered prior to such use, except for 

bagged food in warehouse storage which 

need not be removed or covered prior to 

applications of formulations containing Noctyl bicycloheptene dicarboximide. 

Compliance with the tolerance level 

specified in this paragraph is to be 

determined by measuring only N-octyl 

bicycloheptene dicarboximide, in or on the 

commodity. 

Because there have been no uses of Noctyl bicycloheptenedicarboximide, 

MGK-264, in or on growing agricultural 

crops for more than 10 years, the 

tolerance exemption is no longer needed 

and therefore should be revoked. 

Consequently, EPA is proposing to 

revoke the tolerance exemption in 40 

CFR 180.905(a)(2) for N-octyl 

bicyclo(2,2,1)-5-heptene-2,3- 

dicarboximide, when applied to 

growing crops. In addition, EPA is 

proposing to revise 40 CFR 180.905(a) as 

described herein under proposals for 

pyrethrum. 

There are no Codex MRLs for N-octyl 

bicycloheptene dicarboximide. 

16. Phosmet. On November 4, 2005, 

EPA published a notice in the Federal 

Register (70 FR 67167) (FRL–7744–7) 

that announced the Agency’s receipt of 

requests from the registrants for 

amendments to delete uses in certain 

pesticide registrations, including the 

last phosmet uses on cotton. No 

comments were received by EPA and 

the Agency approved the use deletions 

on December 5, 2005, and permitted the 

registrants to sell and distribute existing 

stocks for a period of 18 months after 

approval; i.e., until June 5, 2007. The 

Agency believes that end users have had 

sufficient time to exhaust those existing 

stocks and for treated cotton to have 

cleared the channels of trade. Therefore, 

EPA is proposing to revoke the 

tolerances in 40 CFR 180.261(a) on 

cotton, refined oil and cotton, 

undelinted seed. 

Also, in order to describe more clearly 

the measurement and scope or coverage 

of the tolerances, EPA is proposing to 

revise the section heading in 40 CFR 

180.261 from N-(mercaptomethyl) 

phthalimide S-(O,O-dimethyl 

phosphorodithioate) and its oxygen 

analog to phosmet and revise the 

introductory text containing the 

tolerance expression in 40 CFR 

180.261(a) to read as follows: 

Tolerances are established for residues of 

the insecticide phosmet, N-(mercaptomethyl) 

phthalimide S-(O,O-dimethyl 

phosphorodithioate), including its 

metabolites and degradates, in or on the 

commodities in the table in this paragraph. 

Compliance with the tolerance levels 

specified in this paragraph is to be 

determined by measuring only the sum of 

phosmet, N-(mercaptomethyl) phthalimide S- 

(O,O-dimethyl phosphorodithioate), and its 

oxygen analog, N-(mercaptomethyl) 

phthalimide S-(O,O-dimethyl

phosphorothioate, calculated as the 

stoichiometric equivalent of phosmet, in or 

on the commodity. 

In addition, EPA is proposing to 

revise the introductory text containing 

the tolerance expression for regional 

tolerances in 40 CFR 180.261(c) to read 

as follows: 

Tolerances with regional registration are 

established for residues of the insecticide 

phosmet, N-(mercaptomethyl) phthalimide S- 

(O,O-dimethylp phosphorodithioate), 

including its metabolites and degradates, in 

or on the commodities in the table in this 

paragraph. Compliance with the tolerance 

levels specified in this paragraph is to be 

determined by measuring only the sum of 

phosmet, N-(mercaptomethyl) phthalimide S- 

(O,O-dimethyl phosphorodithioate), and its 

oxygen analog, N-(mercaptomethyl) 

phthalimide S-(O,O-dimethyl 

phosphorothioate, calculated as the 

stoichiometric equivalent of phosmet, in or 

on the commodity. 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2
28168 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 19, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

There are Codex MRLs on certain 

commodities for phosmet, including an 

MRL on cottonseed. 

17. Picloram. As a post-RED action, 

EPA made certain tolerance 

determinations for picloram on 

November 19, 2009 in a document made 

available in the public docket of this 

proposed rule. Because there is no need 

for a different tolerance expression for 

the existing tolerances for picloram 

residues in processed grain 

commodities in 40 CFR 180.292(a)(2), 

EPA determined that paragraph (a)(2) 

should be removed and the tolerances 

there should be moved into the table in 

§ 180.292(a)(1), which therefore should 

be redesignated as paragraph (a). 

Also, in order to describe more clearly 

the measurement and scope or coverage 

of the tolerances, EPA is proposing to 

revise the introductory text containing 

the tolerance expression in newly 

designated 40 CFR 180.292(a) to read as 

follows: 

Tolerances are established for residues of 

the herbicide picloram, 4-amino-3,5,6- 

trichloropicolinic acid, including its 

metabolites and degradates, in or on the 

commodities in the table in this paragraph 

from its application in the acid form or in the 

form of its salts. Compliance with the 

tolerance levels specified in this paragraph is 

to be determined by measuring only 

picloram, 4-amino-3,5,6-trichloropicolinic 

acid, in or on the commodity. 

Based on available field trial data that 

showed picloram residues of 195 ppm 

in or on grass forage at an application 

rate of 0.5 lb ae/A with a 0–day PHI, 

EPA determined that the existing 

tolerance should be increased from 80.0 

to 400 ppm, which is an appropriate 

tolerance level for grass forage for the 

existing maximum approved rate of 1.0 

lb ae/A. Also, based on available data 

that showed picloram residues as high 

as 170 ppm in or on grass hay at an 

application rate of 2.0 lb ae/A with a 

14–day PHI and 213 ppm in or on grass 

hay at an application rate of 0.5 lb ae/ 

A with a 0–day PHI, EPA determined 

that a tolerance should be established 

on grass hay at 225 ppm. Therefore, EPA 

is proposing to increase the tolerance in 

40 CFR 180.292(a) on grass, forage to 

400 ppm and establish a tolerance in 40 

CFR 180.292(a) on grass, hay at 225 

ppm. The Agency determined that the 

increased tolerance is safe; i.e., there is 

a reasonable certainty that no harm will 

result from aggregate exposure to the 

pesticide chemical residue. 

Based on available cattle exaggerated 

feeding data at 1.39X the Maximum 

Theoretical Dietary Burden (MTDB) that 

showed picloram residues at 0.5 ppm in 

fat, 0.5 ppm in muscle, 18 ppm in 

kidney, 2.0 ppm in liver, and 0.29 ppm 

in milk, EPA calculated that the 

maximum expected residues in fat, 

muscle, meat byproducts, and milk at 

1X MTDB to be 0.36 ppm, 0.36 ppm, 

12.95 ppm, and 0.21 pm, respectively. 

Therefore, the Agency determined that 

the tolerances for the fat and meat of 

cattle, goats, horses, and sheep should 

be increased from 0.2 to 0.4 ppm, the 

tolerance for milk should be increased 

from 0.05 to 0.25 ppm; the separate 

tolerances for the kidney of cattle, goats, 

horses, and sheep, and liver of cattle, 

goats, horses, and sheep should be 

revoked because they will be covered by 

redefined meat byproduct tolerances for 

cattle, goats, horses, and sheep, and the 

redefined meat byproduct tolerances 

should be increased to 15 ppm. 

Consequently, EPA is proposing to 

increase the tolerances in 40 CFR 

180.292(a) on cattle, fat; cattle, meat; 

goat, fat; goat, meat; horse, fat; horse, 

meat; sheep, fat; and sheep, meat to 0.4 

ppm, and milk to 0.25 ppm. Also, EPA 

is proposing to revoke the individual 

tolerances in 40 CFR 180.292(a) on 

cattle, kidney; cattle, liver; goat, kidney; 

goat, liver; horse, kidney, horse, liver; 

sheep kidney; and sheep, liver. In 

addition, EPA is proposing to revise the 

tolerances in 40 CFR 180.292(a) on 

‘‘cattle, meat byproducts, except kidney 

and liver’’ to ‘‘cattle, meat byproducts;’’ 

‘‘goat, meat byproducts, except kidney 

and liver’’ to ‘‘goat, meat byproducts;’’ 

‘‘horse, meat byproducts, except kidney 

and liver’’ to ‘‘horse, meat byproducts;’’ 

and ‘‘sheep, meat byproducts, except 

kidney and liver’’ to ‘‘sheep, meat 

byproducts;’’ and increase them to 15 

ppm. The Agency determined that the 

increased tolerances are safe; i.e., there 

is a reasonable certainty that no harm 

will result from aggregate exposure to 

the pesticide chemical residue. 

Although grass commodities are not 

significant feed items for swine, wheat 

milled byproduct feed items which have 

picloram tolerances show that the 

MTDB for swine is low (1.5 ppm). The 

lowest levels of picloram fed to cattle 

and sheep (200 and 30 ppm) were well 

above the anticipated exposure for hogs 

and the 30 ppm dose showed picloram 

residues in kidney, liver, fat, and 

muscle of sheep were 0.38 ppm, <0.05 

ppm, <0.05 ppm, and <0.05 ppm, 

respectively. Based on the available 

data, the Agency determined that the 

tolerances for hog, fat; hog, meat; and 

hog, meat byproducts should be 

decreased from 0.2 to 0.05 ppm, and 

hog, kidney and hog, liver should be 

decreased to 0.05 ppm. However, these 

separate kidney and liver tolerances are 

no longer needed since they will be 

covered by redefined meat byproduct 

tolerances. Therefore, EPA is proposing 

to decrease the tolerances in 40 CFR 

180.292(a) on hog, fat and hog, meat, 

each to 0.05 ppm. Also EPA is 

proposing to revoke the individual 

tolerances in 40 CFR 180.292(a) on hog, 

kidney and hog, liver. In addition, EPA 

is proposing to revise the tolerance in 40 

CFR 180.292(a) on ‘‘hog, meat 

byproducts, except kidney and liver’’ to 

‘‘hog, meat byproducts’’ and decrease it 

to 0.05 ppm. 

There are no Codex MRLs for 

picloram. 

18. Propazine. Because there have 

been no active registrations for 

propazine use on sweet sorghum for 

more than 4 years, EPA is proposing to 

revoke the tolerance in 40 CFR 180.243 

on sorghum, sweet. 

Tolerances established in 40 CFR 

180.243 are currently defined for 

residues of propazine (the parent 

compound) only. Based on the results of 

sorghum metabolism data, the Agency 

determined that two chlorinated 

degradates should be included in the 

residue definition. Therefore, in order to 

describe more clearly the measurement 

and scope or coverage of the tolerances, 

EPA is proposing to revise the 

introductory text containing the 

tolerance expression in 40 CFR 180.243, 

and designate it as paragraph (a), to read 

as follows: 

Tolerances are established for residues of 

the herbicide propazine, 2-chloro-4,6- 

bis(isopropylamino)-s-triazine, including its 

metabolites and degradates, in or on the 

commodities in the table in this paragraph. 

Compliance with the tolerance levels 

specified in this paragraph is to be 

determined by measuring only the sum of 

propazine, 2-chloro-4,6-bis(isopropylamino)- 

s-triazine, and its two chlorinated degradates, 

2-amino-4-chloro-6-isopropylamino-striazine and 2,4-diamino-6-chloro-s-triazine, 

calculated as the stoichiometric equivalent of 

propazine, in or on the commodity. 

Also, in newly designated 40 CFR 

180.243(a), EPA is removing the ‘‘(N)’’ 

designation from all entries to conform 

to current Agency administrative 

practice, where the ‘‘N’’ designation 

means negligible residues, and revising 

commodity terminology to conform to 

current Agency practice as follows: 

‘‘sorghum, forage’’ to ‘‘sorghum, grain, 

forage.’’ 

In accordance with current Agency 

practice, EPA is proposing to revise 40 

CFR 180.243 by adding separate 

paragraphs (b), (c), and (d), and 

reserving those sections for tolerances 

with section 18 emergency exemptions, 

regional registrations, and indirect or 

inadvertent residues, respectively. 

There are no Codex MRLs for 

propazine. 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 19, 2010 / Proposed Rules 28169 

19. Pyrethrum. Currently, there are 

tolerance exemptions in 40 CFR 

180.905(a)(6) for pyrethrum and 

pyrethrins when applied to growing 

crops in accordance with good 

agricultural practice. Because there have 

been no active registrations in the 

United States for pyrethrum since 1991, 

there is no longer a need for a tolerance 

exemption on pyrethrum and the 

tolerance exemption for it should be 

revoked. Consequently, EPA is 

proposing to revoke the tolerance 

exemption for pyrethrum in 40 CFR 

180.905(a)(6). While the tolerance 

exemption for pyrethrins will be 

maintained, EPA is proposing to revise 

40 CFR 180.905(a) in accordance with 

the proposed revocation of the tolerance 

exemption for N-octylbicyclo(2,2,1)-5- 

heptene-2,3-dicarboximide in 40 CFR 

180.905(a)(2) as described elsewhere in 

this rule and transfer the entry for 

petroleum oils from 40 CFR 

180.905(a)(3) to 40 CFR 180.905(a)(1), 

which had been reserved, transfer the 

entry for piperonyl butoxide from 40 

CFR 180.905(a)(4) to 40 CFR 

180.905(a)(2), transfer the entry for 

pyrethrins from 40 CFR 180.905(a)(6) to 

40 CFR 180.905(a)(3), transfer the entry 

for rotenone or derris or cube roots from 

40 CFR 180.905(a)(7) to 40 CFR 

180.905(a)(4), transfer the entry for 

Sabadilla from 40 CFR 180.905(a)(8) to 

40 CFR 180.905(a)(5), which had been 

reserved, and remove paragraphs (a)(6), 

(a)(7), and (a)(8). 

There are no Codex MRLs for 

pyrethrum. However, there are Codex 

MRLs for pyrethrins concerning specific 

commodities. 

20. Thiodicarb. Based on available 

field trial at 5X the maximum label rate 

and processing data that showed 

combined thiodicarb residues of 

concern as high as 0.215 ppm on 

cottonseed and 0.228 in cottonseed 

hulls, EPA calculated that the residues 

in cottonseed hulls are unlikely to 

exceed both the current tolerance of 0.4 

ppm on the raw agricultural commodity 

(cotton, undelinted seed) and a 

tolerance of 0.2 ppm recommended for 

cottonseed in the 1998 RED for 

thiodicarb. Because thiodicarb residues 

of concern concentrated by only 1.1X in 

cottonseed hulls (based on average 

residues of 0.200 ppm in cottonseed and 

0.223 ppm in cottonseed hulls), the 

Agency determined that residues in 

cottonseed hulls will be covered by the 

tolerance on the raw agricultural 

commodity and that the existing 

tolerance of 0.8 ppm on cottonseed 

hulls is no longer needed and should be 

revoked. Therefore, EPA is proposing to 

revoke the tolerance in 40 CFR 

180.407(a) on cotton, hulls. 

There are no Codex MRLs for 

thiodicarb. 

21. Thiophanate-methyl. Currently, 

tolerances for the fungicide thiophanatemethyl are expressed in 40 CFR 

180.371(a) and 180.371(c) for the 

combined residues of thiophanatemethyl, dimethyl ((1,2-phenylene) bis 

(iminocarbonothioyl)) bis(carbamate), 

and its metabolite methyl 2- 

benzimidazoyl carbamate (MBC), 

calculated as thiophanate-methyl. In 

order to describe more clearly the 

measurement and scope or coverage of 

the tolerances, EPA is proposing to 

revise the introductory text containing 

the tolerance expression in 40 CFR 

180.371(a) to read as follows: 

Tolerances are established for residues of 

thiophanate-methyl, dimethyl ((1,2- 

phenylene) bis (iminocarbonothioyl)) 

bis(carbamate), including its metabolites and 

degradates, in or on the commodities in the 

table in this paragraph. Compliance with the 

tolerance levels specified in this paragraph is 

to be determined by measuring only the sum 

of thiophanate-methyl, dimethyl ((1,2- 

phenylene) bis (iminocarbonothioyl)) 

bis(carbamate), and its metabolite, methyl 2- 

benzimidazoyl carbamate (MBC), calculated 

as the stoichiometric equivalent of 

thiophanate-methyl, in or on the commodity. 

In addition, EPA is proposing to 

revise the introductory text containing 

the tolerance expression in 40 CFR 

180.371(c) to read as follows: 

A tolerance with a regional registration is 

established for residues of thiophanatemethyl, dimethyl ((1,2-phenylene) bis 

(iminocarbonothioyl)) bis(carbamate), 

including its metabolites and degradates, in 

or on the commodity in the table in this 

paragraph. Compliance with the tolerance 

level specified in this paragraph is to be 

determined by measuring only the sum of 

thiophanate-methyl, dimethyl ((1,2- 

phenylene) bis (iminocarbonothioyl)) 

bis(carbamate), and its metabolite, methyl 2- 

benzimidazoyl carbamate (MBC), calculated 

as the stoichiometric equivalent of 

thiophanate-methyl, in or on the commodity. 

Because tolerances for FIFRA section 

18 emergency exemptions in 40 CFR 

180.371(b) for cotton, gin byproducts 

and cotton, undelinted seed expired on 

December 31, 2008, blueberry expired 

on June 30, 2009, and citrus, mushroom, 

and vegetable, fruiting, group 8 expired 

on December 31, 2009, they should be 

removed. Therefore, EPA is proposing to 

remove the expired tolerances in 40 CFR 

180.371(b) for blueberry; citrus; cotton, 

gin byproducts; cotton, undelinted seed; 

mushroom; and vegetable, fruiting, 

group 8. Consequently, because no 

tolerances will remain there, EPA is also 

proposing to reserve 40 CFR 180.371(b). 

Because sugar beet tops are no longer 

considered by the Agency to be a 

significant feed item that will contribute 

to the overall dietary burden of 

livestock, the tolerance is no longer 

needed and should be revoked. 

Therefore, EPA is proposing to revoke 

the tolerance in 40 CFR 180.371(a) on 

beet, sugar, tops. 

Because there have been no active 

registrations in the United States for 

thiophanate-methyl use on sugarcane 

for more than 9 years, the tolerance 

should be revoked. Therefore, EPA is 

proposing to revoke the tolerance in 40 

CFR 180.371(a) on sugarcane, cane. 

Based on available cattle feeding data 

at exaggerated pesticide dose levels and 

MTDB for cattle, the Agency determined 

that there is no reasonable expectation 

of detecting finite residues of 

thiophanate-methyl residues of concern 

in the milk and fat, meat, and meat 

byproducts of cattle, goats, horses and 

sheep. Therefore, these tolerances are no 

longer needed under 40 CFR 180.6(a)(3). 

Consequently, EPA is proposing to 

revoke the tolerances in 40 CFR 

180.371(a) on cattle, fat; cattle, meat; 

cattle, meat byproducts; goat, fat; goat, 

meat; goat, meat byproducts; horse, fat; 

horse, meat; horse, meat byproducts; 

sheep, fat; sheep, meat; and sheep, meat 

byproducts; and milk. 

Based on available data provided to 

support reregistration that showed 

thiophanate-methyl residues of concern, 

the Agency determined that tolerances 

should be established on aspirated grain 

fractions (based on soybean) at 12 ppm 

and wheat forage at 1.1 ppm. Therefore, 

EPA is proposing to establish tolerances 

in 40 CFR 180.371(a) on grain, aspirated 

fractions at 12 ppm and wheat, forage at 

1.1 ppm. 

In the Federal Register of July 11, 

2007 (72 FR 37646)(FRL–8131–6), EPA 

issued a final rule which revoked, 

modified, and established certain 

tolerances for specific pesticide active 

ingredients, including thiophanatemethyl, for which the Agency revised 

the commodity terminology in 40 CFR 

180.371(a) for bean (snap and dry) into 

bean, dry, seed and bean, snap, 

succulent, and inadvertently decreased 

the tolerance for bean, snap, succulent 

from 2.0 to 0.2 ppm. However, in the 

Federal Register of September 20, 2006 

(71 FR 54953)(FRL–8078–2), EPA issued 

a proposed rule which proposed to 

revise the tolerance in 40 CFR 

180.371(a) for bean (snap and dry) into 

bean, dry, seed and bean, snap, 

succulent, and stated that the tolerance 

for bean, snap, succulent would be 

maintained at 2.0 ppm. Consequently, 

the Agency is proposing to reinstate the 

correct tolerance level for the tolerance 

in 40 CFR 180.371(a) on bean, snap, 

succulent to 2.0 ppm. 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2
28170 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 19, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

There are no Codex MRLs for 

thiophanate-methyl. 

B. What is the Agency’s Authority for 

Taking this Action? 

A ‘‘tolerance’’ represents the 

maximum level for residues of pesticide 

chemicals legally allowed in or on raw 

agricultural commodities and processed 

foods. Section 408 of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 

346a, as amended by FQPA of 1996, 

Public Law 104–170, authorizes the 

establishment of tolerances, exemptions 

from tolerance requirements, 

modifications in tolerances, and 

revocation of tolerances for residues of 

pesticide chemicals in or on raw 

agricultural commodities and processed 

foods. Without a tolerance or 

exemption, food containing pesticide 

residues is considered to be unsafe and 

therefore ‘‘adulterated’’ under section 

402(a) of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 342(a). Such 

food may not be distributed in interstate 

commerce (21 U.S.C. 331(a)). For a fooduse pesticide to be sold and distributed, 

the pesticide must not only have 

appropriate tolerances under the 

FFDCA, but also must be registered 

under FIFRA (7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.). 

Food-use pesticides not registered in the 

United States must have tolerances in 

order for commodities treated with 

those pesticides to be imported into the 

United States. 

EPA is proposing these tolerance/ 

tolerance exemption actions to 

implement the tolerance 

recommendations made during the 

reregistration and tolerance 

reassessment processes (including 

follow-up on canceled or additional 

uses of pesticides). As part of these 

processes, EPA is required to determine 

whether each of the amended 

tolerances/tolerance exemptions meets 

the safety standard of FQPA. The safety 

finding determination is discussed in 

detail in each post-FQPA RED and 

TRED for the active ingredient. REDs 

and TREDs recommend the 

implementation of certain tolerance/ 

tolerance exemption actions, including 

modifications to reflect current use 

patterns, to meet safety findings, and 

change commodity names and 

groupings in accordance with new EPA 

policy. Printed and electronic copies of 

the REDs and TREDs are available as 

provided in Unit II.A. 

EPA has issued REDs for acephate, 

cacodylic acid, ethoprop, hexazinone, 

methamidophos, N-octyl bicycloheptene 

dicarboximide, phosmet, picloram, 

pyrethrum (see pyrethrins RED), and 

thiophanate-methyl, and TREDs for 

hexazinone and propazine, as noted in 

Unit II.A., and made a safety finding 

which reassessed picloram tolerances 

according to the FFDCA standard, 

maintaining them when new picloram 

tolerances were established on January 

5, 1999 (64 FR 418) (FRL–6039–4), and 

since then made certain tolerance 

determinations for picloram on 

November 19, 2009 in a document made 

available in the public docket of this 

proposed rule, as noted in Unit II.A. 

REDs and TREDs contain the Agency’s 

evaluation of the database for these 

pesticides, including requirements for 

additional data on the active ingredients 

to confirm the potential human health 

and environmental risk assessments 

associated with current product uses, 

and in REDs state conditions under 

which these uses and products will be 

eligible for reregistration. The REDs and 

TREDs recommended the establishment, 

modification, and/or revocation of 

specific tolerances/tolerance 

exemptions. RED and TRED 

recommendations such as establishing 

or modifying tolerances, and in some 

cases revoking tolerances, are the result 

of assessment under the FFDCA 

standard of ‘‘reasonable certainty of no 

harm.’’ However, tolerance revocations 

recommended in REDs and TREDs that 

are proposed in this document do not 

need such assessment when the 

tolerances are no longer necessary. 

EPA’s general practice is to propose 

revocation of tolerances/tolerance 

exemptions for residues of pesticide 

active ingredients on crops for which 

FIFRA registrations no longer exist and 

on which the pesticide may therefore no 

longer be used in the United States. EPA 

has historically been concerned that 

retention of tolerances that are not 

necessary to cover residues in or on 

legally treated foods may encourage 

misuse of pesticides within the United 

States. Nonetheless, EPA will establish 

and maintain tolerances even when 

corresponding domestic uses are 

canceled if the tolerances, which EPA 

refers to as ‘‘import tolerances,’’ are 

necessary to allow importation into the 

United States of food containing such 

pesticide residues. However, where 

there are no imported commodities that 

require these import tolerances, the 

Agency believes it is appropriate to 

revoke tolerances for unregistered 

pesticides in order to prevent potential 

misuse. 

Furthermore, as a general matter, the 

Agency believes that retention of import 

tolerances not needed to cover any 

imported food may result in 

unnecessary restriction on trade of 

pesticides and foods. Under section 408 

of FFDCA, a tolerance/tolerance 

exemption may only be established or 

maintained if EPA determines that the 

tolerance is safe based on a number of 

factors, including an assessment of the 

aggregate exposure to the pesticide and 

an assessment of the cumulative effects 

of such pesticide and other substances 

that have a common mechanism of 

toxicity. In doing so, EPA must consider 

potential contributions to such exposure 

from all tolerances. If the cumulative 

risk is such that the tolerances in 

aggregate are not safe, then every one of 

these tolerances is potentially 

vulnerable to revocation. Furthermore, 

if unneeded tolerances are included in 

the aggregate and cumulative risk 

assessments, the estimated exposure to 

the pesticide would be inflated. 

Consequently, it may be more difficult 

for others to obtain needed tolerances or 

to register needed new uses. To avoid 

potential trade restrictions, the Agency 

is proposing to revoke tolerances/ 

tolerance exemptions for residues on 

crops uses for which FIFRA 

registrations no longer exist, unless 

someone expresses a need for such 

tolerances/tolerance exemptions. 

Through this proposed rule, the Agency 

is inviting individuals who need these 

import tolerances to identify themselves 

and the tolerances that are needed to 

cover imported commodities. 

Parties interested in retention of the 

tolerances/tolerance exemptions should 

be aware that additional data may be 

needed to support retention. These 

parties should be aware that, under 

FFDCA section 408(f), if the Agency 

determines that additional information 

is reasonably required to support the 

continuation of a tolerance, EPA may 

require that parties interested in 

maintaining the tolerances provide the 

necessary information. If the requisite 

information is not submitted, EPA may 

issue an order revoking the tolerance/ 

tolerance exemption at issue. 

When EPA establishes tolerances for 

pesticide residues in or on raw 

agricultural commodities, consideration 

must be given to the possible residues 

of those chemicals in meat, milk, 

poultry, and/or eggs produced by 

animals that are fed agricultural 

products (for example, grain or hay) 

containing pesticides residues (40 CFR 

180.6). When considering this 

possibility, EPA can conclude that: 

1. Finite residues will exist in meat, 

milk, poultry, and/or eggs. 

2. There is a reasonable expectation 

that finite residues will exist. 

3. There is a reasonable expectation 

that finite residues will not exist. If 

there is no reasonable expectation of 

finite pesticide residues in or on meat, 

milk, poultry, or eggs, tolerances do not 

need to be established for these 

commodities (40 CFR 180.6(b) and (c)). 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 19, 2010 / Proposed Rules 28171 

EPA has evaluated certain specific 

meat, milk, poultry, and egg tolerances 

proposed for revocation in this 

document and has concluded that there 

is no reasonable expectation of finite 

pesticide residues of concern in or on 

those commodities. 

C. When Do These Actions Become 

Effective? 

With the exception of certain 

tolerances for cacodylic acid, dicloran, 

disulfoton, ethoprop, malathion, 

methamidophos, and methyl bromide 

for which EPA is proposing specific 

expiration/revocation dates, the Agency 

is proposing that these revocations, 

modifications, establishment of 

tolerances, and revisions of tolerance 

nomenclature become effective on the 

date of publication of the final rule in 

the Federal Register. With the exception 

of the proposed revocation of specific 

tolerances for cacodylic acid, dicloran, 

disulfoton, ethoprop, malathion, 

methamidophos, and methyl bromide, 

the Agency believes that existing stocks 

of pesticide products labeled for the 

uses associated with the tolerances 

proposed for revocation have been 

completely exhausted and that treated 

commodities have cleared the channels 

of trade. EPA is proposing expiration/ 

revocation dates of January 1, 2012 for 

the cacodylic acid tolerance on cotton, 

undelinted seed; November 2, 2011 for 

the dicloran tolerance on carrot, roots, 

postharvest; December 31, 2012 for the 

disulfoton tolerances on bean, lima; 

bean, snap, succulent; broccoli; Brussels 

sprouts; cabbage; cauliflower; cotton, 

undelinted seed; lettuce, head; lettuce, 

leaf; and asparagus; June 30, 2013 for 

the disulfoton tolerance on coffee, green 

bean; January 9, 2012 for the ethoprop 

tolerance on pineapple; July 15, 2011 for 

the malathion tolerance on cranberry; 

December 31, 2012 for the 

methamidophos tolerances on broccoli; 

cabbage; cotton, undelinted seed; 

tomato; and potato; October 19, 2010 for 

the methyl bromide tolerance on 

timothy, hay, postharvest; and October 

31, 2011 for the methyl bromide 

tolerances on alfalfa, hay, postharvest 

and cotton, undelinted seed, 

postharvest. The Agency believes that 

these revocation dates allow users to 

exhaust stocks and allows sufficient 

time for passage of treated commodities 

through the channels of trade. However, 

if EPA is presented with information 

that existing stocks would still be 

available and that information is 

verified, the Agency will consider 

extending the expiration date of the 

tolerance. If you have comments 

regarding existing stocks and whether 

the effective date allows sufficient time 

for treated commodities to clear the 

channels of trade, please submit 

comments as described under 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. 

Any commodities listed in this 

proposal treated with the pesticides 

subject to this proposal, and in the 

channels of trade following the 

tolerance revocations, shall be subject to 

FFDCA section 408(l)(5), as established 

by FQPA. Under this unit, any residues 

of these pesticides in or on such food 

shall not render the food adulterated so 

long as it is shown to the satisfaction of 

the Food and Drug Administration that: 

1. The residue is present as the result 

of an application or use of the pesticide 

at a time and in a manner that was 

lawful under FIFRA, and 

2. The residue does not exceed the 

level that was authorized at the time of 

the application or use to be present on 

the food under a tolerance or exemption 

from tolerance. Evidence to show that 

food was lawfully treated may include 

records that verify the dates when the 

pesticide was applied to such food. 

III. International Residue Limits 

In making its tolerance decisions, EPA 

seeks to harmonize U.S. tolerances with 

international standards whenever 

possible, consistent with U.S. food 

safety standards and agricultural 

practices. EPA considers the 

international MRLs established by the 

Codex Alimentarius Commission 

(Codex), as required by FFDCA section 

408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a 

joint U.N. Food and Agriculture 

Organization/World Health 

Organization food standards program, 

and it is recognized as an international 

food safety standards-setting 

organization in trade agreements to 

which the United States is a party. EPA 

may establish a tolerance that is 

different from a Codex MRL; however, 

FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that 

EPA explain the reasons for departing 

from the Codex level. 

The Codex has not established a MRL 

for cacodylic acid, dicamba, EPTC, 

hexazinone, N-octyl bicycloheptene 

dicarboximide, picloram, propazine, 

pyrethrum, thiodicarb, and thiophanatemethyl, or MRL in or on corn, pop, 

grain; corn, pop, stover; or pineapple for 

ethoprop; or MRL in or on citrus, dried 

pulp; citrus, oil; fruit, citrus, group 10; 

or garlic for fenamiphos; or MRL for 

citrus, dried pulp; cranberry; peanut, 

hay; peanut, postharvest; raisins; 

safflower, seed; safflower, refined oil; 

sunflower, seed, postharvest; fat, meat, 

and meat byproducts of cattle, goats, 

hogs, horses, poultry, and sheep; egg; 

milk, fat; or nonmedicated cattle feed 

concentrate blocks for malathion; or 

MRL in or on alfalfa, hay, postharvest; 

cotton, undelinted seed; mango, 

postharvest; papaya, postharvest; or 

timothy, hay, postharvest for bromide 

ion or methyl bromide; or MRL in or on 

leek; strawberry; or watercress for 

methomyl; or MRL in or on broccoli; 

Brussels sprouts; cabbage; lettuce; or 

tomato for methamidophos. 

The Codex has established MRLs for 

dicloran in or on commodities including 

carrot, postharvest at 15 mg/kg. This 

MRL is different than the current 

tolerance established for dicloran at 10 

ppm in the United States, which EPA is 

proposing herein to revoke. The 

tolerance was reassessed in the RED at 

10 ppm and was harmonized with 

Codex at that time. 

The Codex has established MRLs for 

diquat in or on commodities including 

sorghum at 2 mg/kg and soya bean (dry) 

at 0.2 mg/kg. These MRLs are the same 

as the current tolerances for diquat in or 

on sorghum, grain, grain and soybean, 

seed in the United States, which EPA is 

proposing herein to revoke. 

The Codex has established MRLs for 

disulfoton in or on commodities 

including asparagus at 0.02 mg/kg; 

cotton seed at 0.1 mg/kg. These MRLs 

are different than the current tolerances 

established for disulfoton in or on 

asparagus at 0.1 ppm and cotton, 

undelinted seed at 0.75 ppm in the 

United States, both of which EPA is 

proposing herein to revoke. The 

tolerances were reassessed in the RED 

and were not harmonized with Codex 

levels because of differences in good 

agricultural practices. The Codex MRL 

for disulfoton in or on coffee beans is 

the same as the current tolerance for 

disulfoton in or on coffee, green bean, 

which EPA is proposing herein to 

revoke. 

The Codex has established MRLs for 

methamidophos in or on commodities 

including cauliflower at 0.5 mg/kg; 

cotton seed at 0.2 mg/kg; chili peppers 

at 2 mg/kg; sweet peppers at 1 mg/kg; 

and potato at 0.05 mg/kg. These MRLs 

are different than the current tolerances 

established for methamidophos from 

methamidophos application in or on 

cauliflower at 1.0 ppm; cotton, 

undelinted seed at 0.1 ppm; pepper at 

1.0 ppm; and potato at 0.1 ppm in the 

United States, all of which EPA is 

proposing herein to revoke. The 

tolerances were reassessed in the RED 

and were not harmonized with the 

Codex levels because of differences in 

good agricultural practices. While 

methamidophos is a metabolite of 

acephate and EPA is proposing herein 

the re-instatement of certain 

methamidophos tolerances as a result of 

the application of acephate, Codex has 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2
28172 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 19, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

established MRLs for acephate but for 

compliance purposes has defined them 

as only acephate residues. 

The Codex has established MRLs for 

phosmet in or on commodities 

including cotton seed at 0.05 mg/kg. 

This MRL is different than the current 

tolerance established for phosmet in or 

on cotton, undelinted seed at 0.1 ppm 

in the United States, which EPA is 

proposing herein to revoke. The 

tolerance was reassessed in the RED and 

was not harmonized with the Codex 

level because of differences in good 

agricultural practices and tolerance 

expression where total residues for U.S. 

tolerances included phosmet’s oxygen 

analog. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

In this proposed rule, EPA is 

proposing to establish tolerances under 

FFDCA section 408(e), and also modify 

and revoke specific tolerances/tolerance 

exemptions established under FFDCA 

section 408. The Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) has exempted these 

types of actions (e.g., establishment and 

modification of a tolerance and 

tolerance revocation for which 

extraordinary circumstances do not 

exist) from review under Executive 

Order 12866, entitled Regulatory 

Planning and Review (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993). Because this proposed 

rule has been exempted from review 

under Executive Order 12866 due to its 

lack of significance, this proposed rule 

is not subject to Executive Order 13211, 

entitled Actions Concerning Regulations 

That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May 

22, 2001). This proposed rule does not 

contain any information collections 

subject to OMB approval under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq., or impose any 

enforceable duty or contain any 

unfunded mandate as described under 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Public 

Law 104–4). Nor does it require any 

special considerations as required by 

Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal 

Actions to Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations (59 FR 7629, 

February 16, 1994); or OMB review or 

any other Agency action under 

Executive Order 13045, entitled 

Protection of Children from 

Environmental Health Risks and Safety 

Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). 

This action does not involve any 

technical standards that would require 

Agency consideration of voluntary 

consensus standards pursuant to section 

12(d) of the National Technology 

Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 

(NTTAA), Public Law 104–113, section 

12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note). Pursuant to 

the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the Agency 

previously assessed whether 

establishment of tolerances, exemptions 

from tolerances, raising of tolerance 

levels, expansion of exemptions, or 

revocations might significantly impact a 

substantial number of small entities and 

concluded that, as a general matter, 

these actions do not impose a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. These analyses 

for tolerance establishments and 

modifications, and for tolerance 

revocations were published on May 4, 

1981 (46 FR 24950) and on December 

17, 1997 (62 FR 66020) (FRL–5753–1), 

respectively, and were provided to the 

Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small 

Business Administration. Taking into 

account this analysis, and available 

information concerning the pesticides 

listed in this proposed rule, the Agency 

hereby certifies that this proposed rule 

will not have a significant negative 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. In a 

memorandum dated May 25, 2001, EPA 

determined that eight conditions must 

all be satisfied in order for an import 

tolerance or tolerance exemption 

revocation to adversely affect a 

significant number of small entity 

importers, and that there is a negligible 

joint probability of all eight conditions 

holding simultaneously with respect to 

any particular revocation. (This Agency 

document is available in the docket of 

this proposed rule). Furthermore, for the 

pesticides named in this proposed rule, 

the Agency knows of no extraordinary 

circumstances that exist as to the 

present proposal that would change the 

EPA’s previous analysis. Any comments 

about the Agency’s determination 

should be submitted to the EPA along 

with comments on the proposal, and 

will be addressed prior to issuing a final 

rule. In addition, the Agency has 

determined that this action will not 

have a substantial direct effect on States, 

on the relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, as specified in 

Executive Order 13132, entitled 

Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999). Executive Order 13132 requires 

EPA to develop an accountable process 

to ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input 

by State and local officials in the 

development of regulatory policies that 

have federalism implications.’’ ‘‘Policies 

that have federalism implications’’ is 

defined in the Executive order to 

include regulations that have 

‘‘substantial direct effects on the States, 

on the relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government.’’ This proposed 

rule directly regulates growers, food 

processors, food handlers, and food 

retailers, not States. This action does not 

alter the relationships or distribution of 

power and responsibilities established 

by Congress in the preemption 

provisions of section 408(n)(4) of 

FFDCA. For these same reasons, the 

Agency has determined that this 

proposed rule does not have any ‘‘tribal 

implications’’ as described in Executive 

Order 13175, entitled Consultation and 

Coordination with Indian Tribal 

Governments (65 FR 67249, November 

9, 2000). Executive Order 13175, 

requires EPA to develop an accountable 

process to ensure ‘‘meaningful and 

timely input by tribal officials in the 

development of regulatory policies that 

have tribal implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that 

have tribal implications’’ is defined in 

the Executive order to include 

regulations that have ‘‘substantial direct 

effects on one or more Indian tribes, on 

the relationship between the Federal 

Government and the Indian tribes, or on 

the distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the Federal 

Government and Indian tribes.’’ This 

proposed rule will not have substantial 

direct effects on tribal governments, on 

the relationship between the Federal 

Government and Indian tribes, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the Federal 

Government and Indian tribes, as 

specified in Executive Order 13175. 

Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not 

apply to this proposed rule. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Agricultural commodities, Pesticides 

and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: May 5, 2010. 

Steven Bradbury, 

Acting Director, Office of Pesticide Programs. 

Therefore, it is proposed that 40 CFR 

chapter I be amended as follows: 

PART 180—[AMENDED] 

1. The authority citation for part 180 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371. 

2. Section 180.108 is amended as 

follows: 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 19, 2010 / Proposed Rules 28173 

a. Revise the introductory text to 

paragraph (a)(1). 

b. Revise footnote 1 to the table in 

paragraph (a)(1). 

c. Revise paragraph (a)(2). 

d. Add paragraph (a)(3). 

e. Revise paragraph (c). 

§ 180.108 Acephate; tolerances for 

residues. 

(a) * * * (1) Tolerances are 

established for residues of acephate, 

O,S-dimethyl acetyl 

phosphoramidothioate, including its 

metabolites and degradates other than 

methamidophos, in or on the 

commodities in the table in this 

paragraph. Compliance with the 

tolerance levels specified in this 

paragraph is to be determined by 

measuring only acephate, O,S-dimethyl 

acetyl phosphoramidothioate, in or on 

the commodity. 

Commodity1 Parts per million 

* * * * * 

1Where there is a direct use of 

methamidophos on the commodity, residues of 

methamidophos resulting from methamidophos 

application are regulated under 40 CFR 

180.315. 

(2) A tolerance of 0.02 ppm is 

established for residues of acephate, 

O,S-dimethyl acetyl 

phosphoramidothioate, including its 

metabolites and degradates other than 

methamidophos, in or on all food items 

(other than those already covered by a 

higher tolerance as a result of use on 

growing crops) in food handling 

establishments where food and food 

products are held, processed, prepared 

and served, including food service, 

manufacturing and processing 

establishments, such as restaurants, 

cafeterias, supermarkets, bakeries, 

breweries, dairies, meat slaughtering 

and packing plants, and canneries, 

where application of acephate shall be 

limited solely to spot and/or crack and 

crevice treatment (a coarse, lowpressure spray shall be used to avoid 

atomization or splashing of the spray for 

spot treatments; equipment capable of 

delivering a pin-stream of insecticide 

shall be used for crack and crevice 

treatments). Spray concentration shall 

be limited to a maximum of 1.0 percent 

active ingredient. Contamination of food 

or food-contact surfaces shall be 

avoided. Compliance with the tolerance 

levels specified in this paragraph is to 

be determined by measuring only 

acephate, O,S-dimethyl acetyl 

phosphoramidothioate, in or on the 

commodity. 

(3) Tolerances are established for 

residues of methamidophos, O,Sdimethyl phosphoramidothioate, 

including its metabolites and 

degradates, in or on the commodities in 

the table in this paragraph as a result of 

the application of acephate. Compliance 

with the tolerance levels specified in 

this paragraph is to be determined by 

measuring only methamidophos, O,Sdimethyl phosphoramidothioate, in or 

on the commodity. 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

Bean, dry, seed ........................ 1 

Bean, succulent ........................ 1 

Brussels sprouts ....................... 0.5 

Cauliflower ................................ 0.5 

Celery ....................................... 1 

Cranberry .................................. 0.1 

Lettuce, head ............................ 1 

Pepper ...................................... 1 

Peppermint, tops ...................... 1 

Spearmint, tops ........................ 1 

* * * * * 

(c) Tolerances with regional 

registrations. A tolerance with a regional 

registration is established for residues of 

acephate, O,S-dimethyl acetyl 

phosphoramidothioate, including its 

metabolites and degradates other than 

methamidophos, in or on the 

commodity in the table in this 

paragraph. Compliance with the 

tolerance level specified in this 

paragraph is to be determined by 

measuring only acephate, O,S-dimethyl 

acetyl phosphoramidothioate, in or on 

the commodity. 

Commodity1 Parts per 

million 

Nut, macadamia ....................... 0.05 

1Where there is a direct use of 

methamidophos on the commodity, residues of 

methamidophos resulting from methamidophos 

application are regulated under 40 CFR 

180.315. 

* * * * * 

3. Amend § 180.111 as follows: 

a. Revise the table in paragraph (a)(1). 

b. Remove paragraphs (a)(3), (a)(4), 

(a)(5), (a)(6), and (a)(7). 

§ 180.111 Malathion; tolerances for 

residues. 

(a) * * * (1) * * * 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

Expiration/ 

Revocation 

Date 

Alfalfa, forage ... 135 None 

Alfalfa, hay ........ 135 None 

Almond, hulls .... 50 None 

Almond, 

postharvest .... 8 None 

Apple ................. 8 None 

Apricot ............... 8 None 

Asparagus ......... 8 None 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

Expiration/ 

Revocation 

Date 

Avocado ............ 8 None 

Barley, grain, 

postharvest .... 8 None 

Bean, dry, seed 8 None 

Bean, succulent 8 None 

Beet, garden, 

roots .............. 8 None 

Beet, garden, 

tops ............... 8 None 

Beet, sugar, 

roots .............. 1 None 

Beet, sugar, 

tops ............... 8 None 

Blackberry ......... 8 None 

Blueberry .......... 8 None 

Boysenberry ...... 8 None 

Carrot, roots ...... 8 None 

Chayote, fruit .... 8 None 

Chayote, roots .. 8 None 

Cherry ............... 8 None 

Chestnut ........... 1 None 

Clover, forage ... 135 None 

Clover, hay ....... 135 None 

Corn, field, forage ................ 8 None 

Corn, field, 

grain, 

postharvest .... 8 None 

Corn, pop, grain, 

postharvest .... 8 None 

Corn, sweet, forage ................ 8 None 

Corn, sweet, 

kernel plus 

cob with 

husks removed ........... 2 None 

Cowpea, forage 135 None 

Cowpea, hay ..... 135 None 

Cranberry .......... 8 7/15/11 

Cucumber ......... 8 None 

Currant .............. 8 None 

Date, dried fruit 8 None 

Dewberry .......... 8 None 

Eggplant ............ 8 None 

Fig ..................... 8 None 

Flax, seed ......... 0.1 None 

Garlic, bulb ....... 8 None 

Gooseberry ....... 8 None 

Grape ................ 8 None 

Grapefruit .......... 8 None 

Guava ............... 8 None 

Hazelnut ............ 1 None 

Hop, dried 

cones ............. 1 None 

Horseradish ...... 8 None 

Kumquat ........... 8 None 

Leek .................. 8 None 

Lemon ............... 8 None 

Lentil, seed ....... 8 None 

Lespedeza, hay 135 None 

Lime .................. 8 None 

Loganberry ........ 8 None 

Lupin, seed ....... 8 None 

Mango ............... 8 None 

Melon ................ 8 None 

Mushroom ......... 8 None 

Nectarine .......... 8 None 

Nut, macadamia 1 None 

Oat, grain, 

postharvest .... 8 None 

Okra .................. 8 None 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2
28174 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 19, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

Expiration/ 

Revocation 

Date 

Onion, bulb ....... 8 None 

Onion, green ..... 8 None 

Orange .............. 8 None 

Papaya .............. 1 None 

Parsnip .............. 8 None 

Passionfruit ....... 8 None 

Pea ................... 8 None 

Pea, field, hay ... 8 None 

Pea, field, vines 8 None 

Peach ................ 8 None 

Pear .................. 8 None 

Pecan ................ 8 None 

Pepper .............. 8 None 

Peppermint, tops 8 None 

Pineapple .......... 8 None 

Plum .................. 8 None 

Plum, prune ...... 8 None 

Potato ............... 8 None 

Pumpkin ............ 8 None 

Quince .............. 8 None 

Radish ............... 8 None 

Raspberry ......... 8 None 

Rice, grain, 

postharvest .... 8 None 

Rice, wild .......... 8 None 

Rutabaga .......... 8 None 

Rye, grain, 

postharvest .... 8 None 

Salsify, roots ..... 8 None 

Salsify, tops ...... 8 None 

Shallot, bulb ...... 8 None 

Sorghum, grain, 

forage ............ 8 None 

Sorghum, grain, 

grain, 

postharvest .... 8 None 

Soybean, forage 135 None 

Soybean, hay .... 135 None 

Soybean, seed .. 8 None 

Soybean, vegetable, succulent ............. 8 None 

Spearmint, tops 8 None 

Squash, summer 8 None 

Squash, winter .. 8 None 

Strawberry ........ 8 None 

Sweet potato, 

roots .............. 1 None 

Tangerine .......... 8 None 

Tomato .............. 8 None 

Trefoil, forage ... 135 None 

Trefoil, hay ........ 135 None 

Turnip, greens .. 8 None 

Turnip, roots ..... 8 None 

Vegetable, brassica, leafy, 

group 5 .......... 8 None 

Vegetable, leafy, 

except brassica, group 4 8 None 

Vetch, hay ......... 135 None 

Walnut ............... 8 None 

Wheat, grain, 

postharvest .... 8 None 

* * * * * 

4. Revise § 180.117 to read as follows: 

§ 180.117 S-Ethyl dipropylthiocarbamate; 

tolerances for residues. 

(a) General. Tolerances are 

established for residues of the herbicide 

S-ethyl dipropylthiocarbamate, 

including its metabolites and 

degradates, in or on the commodities in 

the table in this paragraph. Compliance 

with the tolerance levels specified in 

this paragraph is to be determined by 

measuring only the sum of S-ethyl 

dipropylthiocarbamate, S-ethyl (2- 

hydroxypropyl)propylcarbamothioate, 

S-(2- 

hydroxyethyl)dipropylcarbamothioate, 

and S-ethyl (3- 

hydroxypropyl)propylcarbamothioate, 

calculated as the stoichiometric 

equivalent of S-ethyl 

dipropylthiocarbamate, in or on the 

commodity. 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

Alfalfa, forage ........................... 0.2 

Alfalfa, hay ................................ 0.6 

Almond ...................................... 0.08 

Almond, hulls ............................ 0.08 

Bean, dry, seed ........................ 0.08 

Bean, succulent ........................ 0.08 

Beet, garden, roots ................... 0.1 

Beet, garden, tops .................... 0.5 

Beet, sugar, molasses .............. 0.4 

Beet, sugar, roots ..................... 0.1 

Beet, sugar, tops ...................... 0.5 

Clover, forage ........................... 0.1 

Clover, hay ............................... 0.1 

Corn, field, forage ..................... 0.08 

Corn, field, grain ....................... 0.08 

Corn, field, stover ..................... 0.08 

Corn, pop, grain ........................ 0.08 

Corn, pop, stover ...................... 0.08 

Corn, sweet, forage .................. 0.08 

Corn, sweet, kernel plus cob 

with husks removed .............. 0.08 

Corn, sweet, stover .................. 0.08 

Cotton, gin byproducts ............. 0.20 

Cotton, undelinted seed ........... 0.08 

Fruit, citrus, group 10 ............... 0.1 

Lespedeza, forage .................... 0.1 

Lespedeza, hay ........................ 0.1 

Pea, succulent .......................... 0.08 

Potato ....................................... 0.1 

Safflower, seed ......................... 0.08 

Sunflower, seed ........................ 0.08 

Sweet potato, roots .................. 0.1 

Tomato ...................................... 0.08 

Trefoil, forage ........................... 0.1 

Trefoil, hay ................................ 0.1 

Walnut ....................................... 0.08 

(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. 

[Reserved] 

(c) Tolerances with regional 

registrations. [Reserved] 

(d) Indirect or inadvertent residues. 

[Reserved] 

5. In § 180.123 revise the table in 

paragraph (a)(1) to read as follows: 

§ 180.123 Inorganic bromide residues 

resulting from fumigation with methyl 

bromide; tolerances for residues. 

(a) * * * (1) * * * 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

Expiration/ 

Revocation 

Date 

Alfalfa, hay, 

postharvest .... 50.0 10/31/11 

Almond, 

postharvest .... 200.0 None 

Apple, 

postharvest .... 5.0 None 

Apricot, 

postharvest .... 20.0 None 

Artichoke, jerusalem, 

postharvest .... 30.0 None 

Asparagus, 

postharvest .... 100.0 None 

Avocado, 

postharvest .... 75.0 None 

Barley, grain, 

postharvest .... 50.0 None 

Bean, lima, 

postharvest .... 50.0 None 

Bean, 

postharvest .... 50.0 None 

Bean, snap, succulent, 

postharvest .... 50.0 None 

Bean, succulent, 

postharvest .... 50.0 None 

Beet, garden, 

roots, 

postharvest .... 30.0 None 

Beet, sugar, 

roots, 

postharvest .... 30.0 None 

Blueberry, 

postharvest .... 20.0 None 

Butternut, 

postharvest .... 200.0 None 

Cabbage, 

postharvest .... 50.0 None 

Cacao bean, 

roasted bean, 

postharvest .... 50.0 None 

Cantaloupe, 

postharvest .... 20.0 None 

Carrot, roots, 

postharvest .... 30.0 None 

Cashew, 

postharvest .... 200.0 None 

Cherry, sweet, 

postharvest .... 20.0 None 

Cherry, tart, 

postharvest .... 20 None 

Chestnut, 

postharvest .... 200.0 None 

Cippolini, bulb, 

postharvest .... 50.0 None 

Citron, citrus, 

postharvest .... 30.0 None 

Coconut, copra, 

postharvest .... 100.0 None 

Coffee, bean, 

green, 

postharvest .... 75.0 None 

Corn, field, 

grain, 

postharvest .... 50.0 None 

Corn, pop, 

postharvest .... 240.0 None 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 19, 2010 / Proposed Rules 28175 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

Expiration/ 

Revocation 

Date 

Corn, sweet, 

kernel plus 

cob with 

husks removed, 

postharvest .... 50.0 None 

Cotton, 

undelinted 

seed, 

postharvest .... 200.0 10/31/11 

Cucumber, 

postharvest .... 30.0 None 

Cumin, seed, 

postharvest .... 100.0 None 

Eggplant, 

postharvest .... 20.0 None 

Garlic, 

postharvest .... 50.0 None 

Ginger, 

postharvest .... 100.0 None 

Grape, 

postharvest .... 20.0 None 

Grapefruit, 

postharvest .... 30.0 None 

Hazelnut, 

postharvest .... 200.0 None 

Horseradish, 

postharvest .... 30.0 None 

Kumquat, 

postharvest .... 30.0 None 

Lemon, 

postharvest .... 30.0 None 

Lime, 

postharvest .... 30.0 None 

Melon, honeydew, 

postharvest .... 20.0 None 

Muskmelon, 

postharvest .... 20.0 None 

Nectarine, 

postharvest .... 20.0 None 

Nut, brazil, 

postharvest .... 200.0 None 

Nut, hickory, 

postharvest .... 200.0 None 

Nut, macadamia, 

postharvest .... 200.0 None 

Oat, postharvest 50.0 None 

Okra, 

postharvest .... 30.0 None 

Onion, bulb, 

postharvest .... 20.0 None 

Onion, green, 

postharvest .... 20.0 None 

Orange, 

postharvest .... 30.0 None 

Parsnip, roots, 

postharvest .... 30.0 None 

Peach, 

postharvest .... 20.0 None 

Peanut, 

postharvest .... 200.0 None 

Pear, 

postharvest .... 5.0 None 

Pea, blackeyed, 

postharvest .... 50.0 None 

Pea, postharvest 50.0 None 

Pecan, 

postharvest .... 200.0 None 

Pepper, 

postharvest .... 30.0 None 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

Expiration/ 

Revocation 

Date 

Pimento, 

postharvest .... 30.0 None 

Pineapple, 

postharvest .... 20.0 None 

Pistachio, 

postharvest .... 200.0 None 

Plum, 

postharvest .... 20.0 None 

Pomegranate, 

postharvest .... 100.0 None 

Potato, 

postharvest .... 75.0 None 

Pumpkin, 

postharvest .... 20.0 None 

Quince, 

postharvest .... 5.0 None 

Radish, 

postharvest .... 30.0 None 

Rice, grain, 

postharvest .... 50.0 None 

Rutabaga, roots, 

postharvest .... 30.0 None 

Rutabaga, tops, 

postharvest .... 30.0 None 

Rye, grain, 

postharvest .... 50.0 None 

Salsify, roots, 

postharvest .... 30.0 None 

Sorghum, grain, 

grain, 

postharvest .... 50.0 None 

Soybean, 

postharvest .... 200.0 None 

Squash, summer, 

postharvest .... 30.0 None 

Squash, winter, 

postharvest .... 20.0 None 

Squash, zucchini, 

postharvest .... 20.0 None 

Strawberry, 

postharvest .... 60.0 None 

Sweet potato, 

postharvest .... 75.0 None 

Tangerine, 

postharvest .... 30.0 None 

Timothy, hay, 

postharvest .... 50.0 10/19/10 

Tomato, 

postharvest .... 20.0 None 

Turnip, roots, 

postharvest .... 30.0 None 

Walnut, 

postharvest .... 200.0 None 

Watermelon, 

postharvest .... 20.0 None 

Wheat ............... 50.0 None 

* * * * * 

6. In § 180.183 revise the section 

heading, and paragraphs (a) and (c) to 

read as follows: 

§ 180.183 Disulfoton; tolerances for 

residues. 

(a) General. Tolerances are 

established for residues of the 

insecticide disulfoton, O,O-diethyl S-(2- 

(ethylthio)ethyl) phosphorodithioate, 

including its metabolites and 

degradates, in or on the commodities in 

the table in this paragraph. Compliance 

with the tolerance levels specified in 

this paragraph is to be determined by 

measuring only the sum of disulfoton, 

O,O-diethyl S-(2-(ethylthio)ethyl) 

phosphorodithioate, and its metabolites 

demeton-S, O,O-diethyl S-(2- 

(ethylthio)ethyl) phosphorothioate; 

disulfoton sulfoxide, O,O-diethyl S-(2- 

(ethylsulfinyl)ethyl) 

phosphorodithioate; disulfoton oxygen 

analog sulfoxide, O,O-diethyl S-(2- 

(ethylsulfinyl)ethyl) phosphorothioate, 

disulfoton sulfone, O,O-diethyl S-(2- 

(ethylsulfonyl)ethyl) 

phosphorodithioate; and disulfoton 

oxygen analog sulfone, O,O-diethyl S-(2- 

(ethylsulfonyl)ethyl) phosphorothioate; 

calculated as the stoichiometric 

equivalent of disulfoton, in or on the 

commodity. 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

Expiration/ 

Revocation 

Date 

Bean, lima ..... 0.75 12/31/12 

Bean, snap, 

succulent ... 0.75 12/31/12 

Broccoli ......... 0.75 12/31/12 

Brussels 

sprouts ...... 0.75 12/31/12 

Cabbage ....... 0.75 12/31/12 

Cauliflower .... 0.75 12/31/12 

Coffee, green 

bean .......... 0.2 6/30/13 

Cotton, 

undelinted 

seed .......... 0.75 12/31/12 

Lettuce, head 0.75 12/31/12 

Lettuce, leaf .. 2 12/31/12 

* * * * * 

(c) Tolerances with regional 

registrations. A tolerance with regional 

registration is established for residues of 

the insecticide disulfoton, O,O-diethyl 

S-(2-(ethylthio)ethyl) 

phosphorodithioate, including its 

metabolites and degradates, in or on the 

commodity in the table in this 

paragraph. Compliance with the 

tolerance levels specified in this 

paragraph is to be determined by 

measuring only the sum of disulfoton, 

O,O-diethyl S-(2-(ethylthio)ethyl) 

phosphorodithioate, and its metabolites 

demeton-S,O,O-diethyl S-(2- 

(ethylthio)ethyl) phosphorothioate; 

disulfoton sulfoxide, O,O-diethyl S-(2- 

(ethylsulfinyl)ethyl) phosphorodi

thioate; disulfoton oxygen analog 

sulfoxide, O,O-diethyl S-(2- 

(ethylsulfinyl)ethyl) phosphorothioate, 

disulfoton sulfone, O,O-diethyl S-(2- 

(ethylsulfonyl)ethyl) phosphorodi

thioate; and disulfoton oxygen analog 

sulfone, O,O-diethyl S-(2- 

(ethylsulfonyl)ethyl)p phosphorothioate; 

calculated as the stoichiometric 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2
28176 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 19, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

equivalent of disulfoton, in or on the 

commodity. 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

Expiration/ 

Revocation 

Date 

Asparagus ..... 0.1 12/31/12 

* * * * * 

7. In § 180.200 revise paragraph (a)(1) 

to read as follows: 

§ 180.200 Dicloran; tolerances for 

residues. 

(a) General. (1) Tolerances are 

established for residues of the fungicide 

dicloran, 2,6-dichloro-4-nitroaniline, 

including its metabolites and 

degradates, in or on the commodities in 

the table in this paragraph. Compliance 

with the tolerance levels specified in 

this paragraph is to be determined by 

measuring only dicloran, 2,6-dichloro-4- 

nitroaniline, in or on the commodity. 

Unless otherwise specified, the 

tolerances prescribed in the following 

table provide for residues from 

preharvest application only. 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

Expiration/ 

Revocation 

Date 

Apricot, 

postharvest .... 20 None 

Bean, snap, succulent ............. 20 None 

Carrot, roots, 

postharvest .... 10 11/2/11 

Celery ............... 15 None 

Cherry, sweet, 

postharvest .... 20 None 

Cucumber ......... 5 None 

Endive ............... 10 None 

Garlic ................ 5 None 

Grape ................ 10 None 

Lettuce .............. 10 None 

Nectarine, 

postharvest .... 20 None 

Onion ................ 10 None 

Peach, 

postharvest .... 20 None 

Plum, prune, 

fresh, 

postharvest .... 15 None 

Potato ............... 0.25 None 

Rhubarb ............ 10 None 

Sweet potato, 

postharvest .... 10 None 

Tomato .............. 5 None 

* * * * * 

§ 180.226 [Amended] 

8. In § 180.226 remove the entries for 

‘‘sorghum, grain, grain’’ and ‘‘soybean, 

seed’’ from the table in paragraph (a)(1). 

9. In § 180.227 revise paragraph (a)(1), 

and the introductory text in paragraphs 

(a)(2) and (a)(3) to read as follows: 

§ 180.227 Dicamba; tolerances for 

residues. 

(a) * * *. (1) Tolerances are 

established for residues of the herbicide 

dicamba, 3,6-dichloro-o-anisic acid, 

including its metabolites and 

degradates, in or on the commodities in 

the table in this paragraph. Compliance 

with the tolerance levels specified in 

this paragraph is to be determined by 

measuring only the sum of dicamba, 3,6- 

dichloro-o-anisic acid, and its 

metabolite, 3,6-dichloro-5-hydroxy-oanisic acid, calculated as the 

stoichiometric equivalent of dicamba, in 

or on the commodity. 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

Barley, grain ............................. 6.0 

Barley, hay ................................ 2.0 

Barley, straw ............................. 15.0 

Corn, field, forage ..................... 3.0 

Corn, field, grain ....................... 0.1 

Corn, field, stover ..................... 3.0 

Corn, pop, grain ........................ 0.1 

Corn, pop, stover ...................... 3.0 

Corn, sweet, forage .................. 0.50 

Corn, sweet, kernel plus cob 

with husks removed .............. 0.04 

Corn, sweet, stover .................. 0.50 

Cotton, undelinted seed ........... 0.2 

Grass, forage, fodder and hay, 

group 17, forage ................... 125.0 

Grass, forage, fodder and hay, 

group 17, hay ........................ 200.0 

Millet, proso, forage .................. 90.0 

Millet, proso, grain .................... 2.0 

Millet, proso, hay ...................... 40.0 

Millet, proso, straw ................... 30.0 

Oat, forage ................................ 90.0 

Oat, grain .................................. 2.0 

Oat, hay .................................... 40.0 

Oat, straw ................................. 30.0 

Rye, forage ............................... 90.0 

Rye, grain ................................. 2.0 

Rye, straw ................................. 30.0 

Sorghum, grain, forage ............. 3.0 

Sorghum, grain, grain ............... 4.0 

Sorghum, grain, stover ............. 10.0 

Sugarcane, cane ...................... 0.3 

Sugarcane, molasses ............... 5.0 

Wheat, forage ........................... 90.0 

Wheat, grain ............................. 2.0 

Wheat, hay ............................... 40.0 

Wheat, straw ............................. 30.0 

(2) Tolerances are established for 

residues of the herbicide dicamba, 3,6- 

dichloro-o-anisic acid, including its 

metabolites and degradates, in or on the 

commodities in the table in this 

paragraph. Compliance with the 

tolerance levels specified in this 

paragraph is to be determined by 

measuring only the sum of dicamba, 3,6- 

dichloro-o-anisic acid, and its 

metabolite, 3,6-dichloro-2- 

hydroxybenzoic acid, calculated as the 

stoichiometric equivalent of dicamba, in 

or on the commodity. 

* * * * * 

(3) Tolerances are established for 

residues of the herbicide dicamba, 3,6- 

dichloro-o-anisic acid, including its 

metabolites and degradates, in or on the 

commodities in the table in this 

paragraph. Compliance with the 

tolerance levels specified in this 

paragraph is to be determined by 

measuring only the sum of dicamba, 3,6- 

dichloro-o-anisic acid, and its 

metabolites, 3,6-dichloro-5-hydroxy-oanisic acid, and 3,6-dichloro-2- 

hydroxybenzoic acid, calculated as the 

stoichiometric equivalent of dicamba, in 

or on the commodity. 

* * * * * 

10. Revise § 180.243 to read as 

follows: 

§ 180.243 Propazine; tolerances for 

residues. 

(a) General. Tolerances are 

established for residues of the herbicide 

propazine, 2-chloro-4,6- 

bis(isopropylamino)-s-triazine, 

including its metabolites and 

degradates, in or on the commodities in 

the table in this paragraph. Compliance 

with the tolerance levels specified in 

this paragraph is to be determined by 

measuring only the sum of propazine, 2- 

chloro-4,6-bis(isopropylamino)-striazine, and its two chlorinated 

degradates, 2-amino-4-chloro-6- 

isopropylamino-s-triazine and 2,4- 

diamino-6-chloro-s-triazine, calculated 

as the stoichiometric equivalent of 

propazine, in or on the commodity. 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

Sorghum, grain, forage ............. 0.25 

Sorghum, grain, grain ............... 0.25 

Sorghum, grain, stover ............. 0.25 

(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. 

[Reserved] 

(c) Tolerances with regional 

registrations. [Reserved] 

(d) Indirect or inadvertent residues. 

[Reserved] 

§ 180.253 [Amended] 

11. In § 180.253 remove the entries for 

‘‘leek,’’ ‘‘strawberry,’’ and ‘‘watercress’’ 

from the table in paragraph (a). 

12. In § 180.261 revise the section 

heading, paragraph (a) and paragraph (c) 

to read as follows: 

§180.261 Phosmet; tolerances for 

residues. 

(a) General. Tolerances are 

established for residues of the 

insecticide phosmet, N- 

(mercaptomethyl) phthalimide S-(O,Odimethyl phosphorodithioate), 

including its metabolites and 

degradates, in or on the commodities in 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 19, 2010 / Proposed Rules 28177 

the table in this paragraph. Compliance 

with the tolerance levels specified in 

this paragraph is to be determined by 

measuring only the sum of phosmet, N- 

(mercaptomethyl) phthalimide S-(O,Odimethyl phosphorodithioate), and its 

oxygen analog, N-(mercaptomethyl) 

phthalimide S-(O,O-dimethyl 

phosphorothioate, calculated as the 

stoichiometric equivalent of phosmet, in 

or on the commodity. 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

Alfalfa, forage ........................... 20 

Alfalfa, hay ................................ 40 

Almond, hulls ............................ 10 

Apple ......................................... 10 

Apricot ....................................... 5 

Blueberry .................................. 10 

Cattle, fat .................................. 0.2 

Cattle, meat .............................. 0.1 

Cattle, meat byproducts ........... 0.1 

Cherry ....................................... 10 

Cranberry .................................. 10 

Fruit, citrus, group 10 ............... 5 

Goat, fat .................................... 0.1 

Goat, meat ................................ 0.1 

Goat, meat byproducts ............. 0.1 

Grape ........................................ 10 

Hog, fat ..................................... 0.2 

Hog, meat ................................. 0.04 

Hog, meat byproducts .............. 0.04 

Horse, fat .................................. 0.1 

Horse, meat .............................. 0.1 

Horse, meat byproducts ........... 0.1 

Kiwifruit ..................................... 25 

Milk ........................................... 0.1 

Nectarine .................................. 5 

Nut, tree, group 14 ................... 0.1 

Pea, dry, seed .......................... 0.5 

Pea, field, hay ........................... 20 

Pea, field, vines ........................ 10 

Pea, succulent .......................... 1 

Peach ........................................ 10 

Pear .......................................... 10 

Plum, prune, fresh .................... 5 

Potato ....................................... 0.1 

Sheep, fat ................................. 0.1 

Sheep, meat ............................. 0.1 

Sheep, meat byproducts .......... 0.1 

Sweet potato, roots .................. 12 

* * * * * 

(c) Tolerances with regional 

registrations. Tolerances with regional 

registration are established for residues 

of the insecticide phosmet, N- 

(mercaptomethyl) phthalimide S-(O,Odimethyl phosphorodithioate), 

including its metabolites and 

degradates, in or on the commodities in 

the table in this paragraph. Compliance 

with the tolerance levels specified in 

this paragraph is to be determined by 

measuring only the sum of phosmet, N- 

(mercaptomethyl) phthalimide S-(O,Odimethyl phosphorodithioate), and its 

oxygen analog, N-(mercaptomethyl) 

phthalimide S-(O,O-dimethyl 

phosphorothioate, calculated as the 

stoichiometric equivalent of phosmet, in 

or on the commodity. 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

Crabapple ................................. 20 

Pistachio ................................... 0.1 

* * * * * 

13. In § 180.262 revise paragraph (a) 

to read as follows: 

§180.262 Ethoprop; tolerances for 

residues. 

(a) General. Tolerances are 

established for residues of the 

nematocide and insecticide ethoprop, 

O-ethyl S,S-dipropyl 

phosphorodithioate, including its 

metabolites and degradates, in or on the 

commodities in the table in this 

paragraph. Compliance with the 

tolerance levels specified in this 

paragraph is to be determined by 

measuring only ethoprop, O-ethyl S,Sdipropyl phosphorodithioate, in or on 

the commodity. 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

Expiration/ 

Revocation 

Date 

Banana ............. 0.02 None 

Bean, lima ......... 0.02 None 

Bean, snap, succulent ............. 0.02 None 

Cabbage ........... 0.02 None 

Corn, field, forage ................ 0.02 None 

Corn, field, grain 0.02 None 

Corn, field, stover ................. 0.02 None 

Corn, sweet, forage ................ 0.02 None 

Corn, sweet, 

kernel plus 

cob with 

husks removed ........... 0.02 None 

Corn, sweet, 

stover ............ 0.02 None 

Cucumber ......... 0.02 None 

Hop, dried 

cones ............. 0.02 None 

Peppermint, tops 0.02 None 

Pineapple .......... 0.02 1/9/12 

Potato ............... 0.02 None 

Spearmint, tops 0.02 None 

Sugarcane, cane 0.02 None 

Sweet potato, 

roots .............. 0.02 None 

* * * * * 

14. In § 180.292 revise paragraph (a) 

to read as follows: 

§180.292 Picloram; tolerances for 

residues. 

(a) General. Tolerances are 

established for residues of the herbicide 

picloram, 4-amino-3,5,6- 

trichloropicolinic acid, including its 

metabolites and degradates, in or on the 

commodities in the table in this 

paragraph from its application in the 

acid form or in the form of its salts. 

Compliance with the tolerance levels 

specified in this paragraph is to be 

determined by measuring only 

picloram, 4-amino-3,5,6- 

trichloropicolinic acid, in or on the 

commodity. 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

Barley, grain ............................. 0.5 

Barley, pearled barley .............. 3.0 

Barley, straw ............................. 1.0 

Cattle, fat .................................. 0.4 

Cattle, meat .............................. 0.4 

Cattle, meat byproducts ........... 15 

Egg ........................................... 0.05 

Goat, fat .................................... 0.4 

Goat, meat ................................ 0.4 

Goat, meat byproducts ............. 15 

Grain, aspirated fractions ......... 4.0 

Grass, forage ............................ 400 

Grass, hay ................................ 225 

Hog, fat ..................................... 0.05 

Hog, meat ................................. 0.05 

Hog, meat byproducts .............. 0.05 

Horse, fat .................................. 0.4 

Horse, meat .............................. 0.4 

Horse, meat byproducts ........... 15 

Milk ........................................... 0.25 

Oat, forage ................................ 1.0 

Oat, grain .................................. 0.5 

Oat, groats/rolled oats .............. 3.0 

Oat, straw ................................. 1.0 

Poultry, fat ................................ 0.05 

Poultry, meat ............................ 0.05 

Poultry, meat byproducts .......... 0.05 

Sheep, fat ................................. 0.4 

Sheep, meat ............................. 0.4 

Sheep, meat byproducts .......... 15 

Wheat, bran .............................. 3.0 

Wheat, forage ........................... 1.0 

Wheat, germ ............................. 3.0 

Wheat, grain ............................. 0.5 

Wheat, middlings ...................... 3.0 

Wheat, shorts ........................... 3.0 

Wheat, straw ............................. 1.0 

* * * * * 

15. In § 180.311 revise paragraph (a) 

to read as follows: 

§180.311 Cacodylic acid; tolerances for 

residues. 

(a) General. A tolerance is established 

for residues of the defoliant cacodylic 

acid, dimethylarsinic acid, including its 

metabolites and degradates, in or on the 

commodity in the table in this 

paragraph. Compliance with the 

tolerance level specified in this 

paragraph is to be determined by 

measuring only those cacodylic acid 

residues convertible to As2O3, expressed 

as the stoichiometric equivalent of 

cacodylic acid, in or on the commodity. 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2
28178 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 19, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

Expiration/ 

Revocation 

Date 

Cotton, 

undelinted 

seed .............. 2.8 1/1/12 

* * * * * 

16. Revise § 180.315 to read as 

follows: 

§180.315 Methamidophos; tolerances for 

residues. 

(a) General. Tolerances are 

established for residues of 

methamidophos, O,S-dimethyl 

phosphoramidothioate, including its 

metabolites and degradates, in or on the 

commodities in the table in this 

paragraph as a result of the application 

of methamidophos. Compliance with 

the tolerance levels specified in this 

paragraph is to be determined by 

measuring only methamidophos, O,Sdimethyl phosphoramidothioate, in or 

on the commodity. 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

Expiration/ 

Revocation 

Date 

Broccoli1 ....... 1.0 12/31/12 

Cabbage2 ...... 1.0 12/31/12 

Cotton, 

undelinted 

seed .......... 0.1 12/31/12 

Potato ........... 0.1 12/31/12 

1 There are no U.S. registrations since 

1989. 2 There are no U.S. registrations since 

2001. 

(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. 

[Reserved] 

(c) Tolerances with regional 

registrations. A tolerance with a regional 

registration is established for residues of 

methamidophos, O,S-dimethyl 

phosphoramidothioate, including its 

metabolites and degradates, in or on the 

commodity in the table in this 

paragraph as a result of the application 

of methamidophos. Compliance with 

the tolerance level specified in this 

paragraph is to be determined by 

measuring only methamidophos, O,Sdimethyl phosphoramidothioate, in or 

on the commodity. 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

Expiration/ 

Revocation 

Date 

Tomato .......... 2.0 12/31/12 

(d) Indirect or inadvertent residues. 

[Reserved] 

17. In § 180.349 revise paragraph (a) 

and paragraph (c) to read as follows: 

§180.349 Fenamiphos; tolerances for 

residues. 

(a) General. Tolerances are 

established for residues of the 

nematicide/insecticide fenamiphos, 

ethyl 3-methyl-4-(methylthio)phenyl 1- 

(methylethyl)phosphoramidate, 

including its metabolites and 

degradates, in or on the commodities in 

the table in this paragraph. Compliance 

with the tolerance levels specified in 

this paragraph is to be determined by 

measuring only the sum of fenamiphos, 

ethyl 3-methyl-4-(methylthio)phenyl 1- 

(methylethyl)phosphoramidate, and its 

cholinesterase inhibiting metabolites 

ethyl 3-methyl-4-(methylsulfinyl)phenyl 

1-(methylethyl)phosphoramidate and 

ethyl 3-methyl-4- 

(methylsulfonyl)phenyl 1- 

(methylethyl)phosphoramidate, 

calculated as the stoichiometric 

equivalent of fenamiphos, in or on the 

commodity. 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

Banana1 .................................... 0.1 

Grape1 ...................................... 0.1 

Grape, raisin1 ........................... 0.3 

Pineapple1 ................................ 0.3 

1 There are no U.S. registrations as of May 

31, 2007. 

* * * * * 

(c) Tolerances with regional 

registrations. [Reserved] 

* * * * * 

18. In § 180.367 revise paragraph (a) 

to read as follows: 

§180.367 N-octyl bicycloheptene 

dicarboximide; tolerances for residues. 

(a) General. A tolerance of 5 parts per 

million is established for residues of the 

insecticide synergist N-octyl 

bicycloheptene dicarboximide, 

including its metabolites and 

degradates, in or on all food items in 

food handling establishments where 

food and food products are held, 

processed, prepared and/or served, 

provided that the food is removed or 

covered prior to such use, except for 

bagged food in warehouse storage which 

need not be removed or covered prior to 

applications of formulations containing 

N-octyl bicycloheptene dicarboximide. 

Compliance with the tolerance level 

specified in this paragraph is to be 

determined by measuring only N-octyl 

bicycloheptene dicarboximide, in or on 

the commodity. 

* * * * * 

19. Revise § 180.371 to read as 

follows: 

§180.371 Thiophanate-methyl; tolerances 

for residues. 

(a) General. Tolerances are 

established for residues of thiophanatemethyl, dimethyl ((1,2-phenylene) bis 

(iminocarbonothioyl)) bis(carbamate), 

including its metabolites and 

degradates, in or on the commodities in 

the table in this paragraph. Compliance 

with the tolerance levels specified in 

this paragraph is to be determined by 

measuring only the sum of thiophanatemethyl, dimethyl ((1,2-phenylene) bis 

(iminocarbonothioyl)) bis(carbamate), 

and its metabolite, methyl 2- 

benzimidazoyl carbamate (MBC), 

calculated as the stoichiometric 

equivalent of thiophanate-methyl, in or 

on the commodity. 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

Almond ...................................... 0.1 

Almond, hulls ............................ 0.5 

Apple ......................................... 2.0 

Apricot ....................................... 15.0 

Banana ..................................... 2.0 

Bean, dry, seed ........................ 0.2 

Bean, snap, succulent .............. 2.0 

Beet, sugar, roots ..................... 0.2 

Cherry, sweet ........................... 20.0 

Cherry, tart ................................ 20.0 

Grain, aspirated fractions ......... 12 

Grape ........................................ 5.0 

Onion, bulb ............................... 0.5 

Onion, green ............................. 3.0 

Peach ........................................ 3.0 

Peanut ...................................... 0.1 

Peanut, hay .............................. 5.0 

Pear .......................................... 3.0 

Pecan ........................................ 0.1 

Pistachio ................................... 0.1 

Plum .......................................... 0.5 

Potato ....................................... 0.1 

Soybean, hulls .......................... 1.5 

Soybean, seed .......................... 0.2 

Strawberry ................................ 7.0 

Vegetable, cucurbit, group 9 .... 1.0 

Wheat, forage ........................... 1.1 

Wheat, grain ............................. 0.1 

Wheat, hay ............................... 0.1 

Wheat, straw ............................. 0.1 

(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. 

[Reserved] 

(c) Tolerances with regional 

registrations. A tolerance with a regional 

registration is established for residues of 

thiophanate-methyl, dimethyl ((1,2- 

phenylene) bis (iminocarbonothioyl)) 

bis(carbamate), including its metabolites 

and degradates, in or on the commodity 

in the table in this paragraph. 

Compliance with the tolerance level 

specified in this paragraph is to be 

determined by measuring only the sum 

of thiophanate-methyl, dimethyl ((1,2- 

phenylene) bis (iminocarbonothioyl)) 

bis(carbamate), and its metabolite, 

methyl 2-benzimidazoyl carbamate 

(MBC), calculated as the stoichiometric 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 19, 2010 / Proposed Rules 28179 

equivalent of thiophanate-methyl, in or 

on the commodity. 

Commodity Parts per million 

Canola, seed ........................ 0.1 

(d) Indirect or inadvertent residues. 

[Reserved] 

20. In § 180.396 revise paragraph (a), 

and paragraph (c) to read as follows: 

§180.396 Hexazinone; tolerances for 

residues. 

(a) General. (1) Tolerances are 

established for residues of the herbicide 

hexazinone, 3-cyclohexyl-6- 

(dimethylamino)-1-methyl-1,3,5- 

triazine-2,4-(1H, 3H)-dione, including 

its metabolites and degradates, in or on 

the commodities in the table in this 

paragraph. Compliance with the 

tolerance levels specified in this 

paragraph is to be determined by 

measuring only the sum of hexazinone, 

3-cyclohexyl-6-(dimethylamino)-1- 

methyl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4-(1H, 3H)- 

dione, and its plant metabolites: 

metabolite A, 3-(4-hydroxycyclohexyl)- 

6-(dimethylamino)-1-methyl-1,3,5- 

triazine-2,4-(1H, 3H)-dione, metabolite 

B, 3-cyclohexyl-6-(methylamino)-1- 

methyl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4-(1H, 3H)- 

dione, metabolite C, 3-(4- 

hydroxycyclohexyl)-6-(methylamino)-1- 

methyl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4-(1H, 3H)- 

dione, metabolite D, 3-cyclohexyl-1- 

methyl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4,6-(1H, 3H, 5H)- 

trione, and metabolite E, 3-(4- 

hydroxycyclohexyl)-1-methyl-1,3,5- 

triazine-2,4,6-(1H, 3H, 5H)-trione, 

calculated as the stoichiometric 

equivalent of hexazinone, in or on the 

commodity. 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

Alfalfa, forage ........................... 2.0 

Alfalfa, hay ................................ 4.0 

Alfalfa, seed .............................. 2.0 

Blueberry .................................. 0.6 

Grass, forage ............................ 250 

Grass, hay ................................ 230 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

Pineapple .................................. 0.6 

Sugarcane, cane ...................... 0.6 

Sugarcane, molasses ............... 4.0 

(2) Tolerances are established for 

residues of the herbicide hexazinone, 3- 

cyclohexyl-6-(dimethylamino)-1- 

methyl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4-(1H, 3H)- 

dione, including its metabolites and 

degradates, in or on the commodities in 

the table in this paragraph. Compliance 

with the tolerance levels specified in 

this paragraph is to be determined by 

measuring only the sum of hexazinone, 

3-cyclohexyl-6-(dimethylamino)-1- 

methyl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4-(1H, 3H)- 

dione, and its animal tissue metabolites: 

metabolite B, 3-cyclohexyl-6- 

(methylamino)-1-methyl-1,3,5-triazine2,4-(1H, 3H)-dione, and metabolite F, 3- 

cyclohexyl-6-amino-1-methyl-1,3,5- 

triazine-2,4-(1H, 3H)-dione, calculated 

as the stoichiometric equivalent of 

hexazinone, in or on the commodity. 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

Cattle, fat .................................. 0.1 

Cattle, meat .............................. 0.5 

Cattle, meat byproducts ........... 4.0 

Goat, fat .................................... 0.1 

Goat, meat ................................ 0.5 

Goat, meat byproducts ............. 4.0 

Hog, fat ..................................... 0.1 

Hog, meat ................................. 0.5 

Hog, meat byproducts .............. 4.0 

Horse, fat .................................. 0.1 

Horse, meat .............................. 0.5 

Horse, meat byproducts ........... 4.0 

Sheep, fat ................................. 0.1 

Sheep, meat ............................. 0.5 

Sheep, meat byproducts .......... 4.0 

(3) A tolerance is established for 

residues of the herbicide hexazinone, 3- 

cyclohexyl-6-(dimethylamino)-1- 

methyl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4-(1H, 3H)- 

dione, including its metabolites and 

degradates, in or on the commodity in 

the table in this paragraph. Compliance 

with the tolerance level specified in this 

paragraph is to be determined by 

measuring only the sum of hexazinone, 

3-cyclohexyl-6-(dimethylamino)-1- 

methyl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4-(1H, 3H)- 

dione, and its metabolites: metabolite B, 

3-cyclohexyl-6-(methylamino)-1-methyl1,3,5-triazine-2,4-(1H, 3H)-dione, 

metabolite C, 3-(4-hydroxycyclohexyl)- 

6-(methylamino)-1-methyl-1,3,5- 

triazine-2,4-(1H, 3H)-dione, metabolite 

C-2, 3-(3-hydroxycyclohexyl)-6- 

(methylamino)-1-methyl-1,3,5-triazine2,4-(1H, 3H)-dione, and metabolite F, 3- 

cyclohexyl-6-amino-1-methyl-1,3,5- 

triazine-2,4-(1H, 3H)-dione, calculated 

as the stoichiometric equivalent of 

hexazinone, in or on the commodity. 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

Milk ........................................... 11 

* * * * * 

(c) Tolerances with regional 

registrations. [Reserved] 

* * * * * 

§ 180.407 [Amended] 

21. In § 180.407 remove the entry for 

‘‘cotton, hulls’’ from the table in 

paragraph (a). 

22. Revise § 180.905 to read as 

follows: 

§180.905 Pesticide chemicals; exemptions 

from the requirement of a tolerance. 

(a) When applied to growing crops, in 

accordance with good agricultural 

practice, the following pesticide 

chemicals are exempt from the 

requirement of a tolerance: 

(1) Petroleum oils. 

(2) Piperonyl butoxide. 

(3) Pyrethrins. 

(4) Rotenone or derris or cube roots. 

(5) Sabadilla. 

(b) These pesticides are not exempted 

from the requirement of a tolerance 

when applied to a crop at the time of or 

after harvest. 

[FR Doc. 2010–11845 Filed 5–18–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–S 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2